Posts Tagged ‘Obama’

Enjoying Your Health Care, Supreme Court Judges? You’re Welcome.

April 23, 2012

A well-cared-for bunch.

I’ve been lucky for several years – and by lucky, I mean that by eking $350 a month out of my tiny salary, I have had access to most of the medical care that I need.

I worked a decent job my first year out of college (this was 2007, mind you, right before everything went to hell) which offered an insurance plan. When I left that job, I continued that insurance through a provision of US law known as COBRA, which allows people to retain their health care for a certain number of months from a former employer, if they pay the full cost of the insurance. It’s expensive as hell, but when you have a tricky chronic illness like I do, better than nothing.

So I paid COBRA til I landed my next job, which, happily for me, came with health insurance. Eighteen months ago, I lost that job without warning, but continued the insurance policy out of pocket. Now my time has run out.

I know some of you, my valued readers, are joining us from outside the US, from places where, perhaps, there is a modicum of humanity and reason in the health care system. Here’s how it works over here.

Got health insurance through a traditional job? Great.

Are you self-employed? I’m sorry. I hope you have several hundred dollars – or even thousands, if you want to insure your family – per month to spare for insurance premiums with deductibles of at least a few thousand dollars. Oh, you’re not rich? Hm. Well, that’s too bad. I hope you don’t break a leg or get cancer or anything.

Because here in the great United States, you’ll probably die before you can come up with the money for that care on your own.

What a lot of people in my position do is cross their fingers and wait. But most of my impecunious twenty-something friends have fallen under the health-care axe sooner or later – often through bike accidents or broken limbs. When folks like them can’t pay the bills, these costs get spread through the system, causing higher costs for care and insurance for everyone else.

My husband is uninsured, but he’s only been sick twice in about five years.

I brought him to my own doctor once, even though he was sans insurance, because he was having chest pains (fortunately it turned out to be a muscular injury). The appointment involved the doctor listening to him with a stethoscope and asking him questions for ten or fifteen minutes. The bill was $170.

A few years later, he got a severe case of tonsillitis. He had a high fever and couldn’t eat. We were in South Africa, so we found a neighborhood clinic and he got a doctor’s consultation, an immediate penicillin injection, a course of oral antibiotics, painkillers and restorative vitamins all for about the equivalent of $40.

That’s less than the copay for one prescription fill of my daily medicine on my current insurance policy.

My husband doesn’t like being uninsured, but he takes it in stride. The prospect of losing my insurance next week is terrifying, because medically, I ain’t doing so well.

I don’t engage in dangerous activities, smoke or drink. But I have a very painful chronic illness whose symptoms are manageable with daily medication. I’m currently trying to stop taking it every day, in preparation for when I may not be able to get it at all. Because that’s another common gem of the American health-care system. You had that condition before you bought this policy? Sorry, we don’t cover any of THAT care.

Next week, if all goes well, I’ll be purchasing a new policy with a premium of a few hundred dollars a month for my husband and me. This’ll cover five doctor visits per year (with a $30 copay for each). If one of us ends up in the hospital, we’ll be responsible for 40% of the total cost, after a deductible of a few thousand dollars, of course. Non-generic medications?  As if! Maternity care? Don’t be ridiculous. But this is the reality of what we can afford (and there is no guarantee another plan will agree to cover me at all or that I could pay what they decide to charge, based on my history).

We’re willing to scrape about $3,000 a year out of our budget so that, God forbid, if one of us ends up in the emergency room, it’ll be a crisis to the tune of $350, not bankruptcy.

Of course, a lot of Americans are foaming at the mouth right now because the infamous President Obama thinks he can patch things up. The US Supreme Court is now debating whether Obama’s new healthcare law is allowable under the Constitution.

Obama and many liberal allies want to improve Americans’ quality of life (or, depending who you ask, take over the world in his dastardly big-government socialist grip) by making sure that the rich or those with job-related insurance are not the only ones with health care. Obama also wants people to be able to access care for conditions that existed before they obtained their current insurance policy, and he’d like to prevent insurance companies from taking people’s money while they’re healthy, and then revoking their coverage when they get sick (another shining gem of health care in America).

Sounds great, right?

NO! Say conservatives.

Why?

To help insurance companies realistically bear the costs of better access to care for everyone, no more would people like my healthy husband be able to opt out of buying insurance. Everyone would be required to buy it, with government subsidies available for those who can’t afford it on their own.

Excellent, say most liberals. A huge influx of healthy new insurance customers will balance the increased costs of sick people’s care. And besides, nobody ever makes it through life without getting sick or hurt. When it happens to uninsured people, those costs are still borne by the larger system and ultimately passed on to all of us. Let’s make every individual responsible for this human inevitability.

This is an American tragedy! Say most conservatives. How can there possibly be a Constitutional basis for forcing every American to buy a certain product? It’s an unprecedented government intrusion.

Federal legislators narrowly passed Obama’s law. Individual states with conservative majorities challenged it in court. And now the nine justices of the US Supreme Court, five of whom lean conservative, and four of whom lean liberal, are going to decide the issue once and for all.

Political writer Paul Begala, in a recent Newsweek Magazine/Daily Beast column, applauds Obamacare – or at least denigrates the conservative Justices (no surprise there – his pieces are usually a mix of liberal cheerleading and big-time political name-dropping).

He echoes what a lot of commentators have noticed about the Justices’ arguments. Conservative Justices see a slippery slope: if the government can force us to buy health insurance, who’s to say it can’t then force us to buy cell phones, burial insurance or broccoli?

It’s bad enough when your parents tell you to eat your vegetables. But the President? Ouch.

Begala points out an obscure 1792 law signed by George Washington requiring every white, able-bodied man between 18 and 45 to purchase a musket and ammunition. Clearly, the Founding Fathers imagined a Constitutional precedent for forcing us to buy something for the good of the nation.

Begala says it’s ludicrous to compare burial insurance to health insurance in this context: “we don’t have a burial-insurance crisis in America.” A lack of burial insurance is not bankrupting American families, eating up 17% of our national budget each year, and leaving Americans to die – as in one recent California case Begala cites, of an uninsured man whose appendix burst when he put off going to the doctor, afraid of the cost –  because they can’t afford medical care.

I’m glad the Justices are there to decide this question in the best interest of the American people, according to our laws.

Were I on the Supreme Court, I would have to recuse myself immediately. In fact, I’m so personally biased I probably shouldn’t even be writing this blog post, in case my simple, self-pitying, ham-handed analysis influences anyone’s opinion.

Unlike the impartial Justices, I lose a lot of sleep to dark worries about what’s going to happen to me when my current insurance runs out. On bad days, I wake up to a forest fire under my skin and lie there wondering if I should take my medicine today, or save the limited supply for a day that might be worse.

The Justices, as well as their legislative colleagues, probably don’t have these worries. As Begala points out, the health care of uninsured people in America adds over $1,000 per year to the policies of those who buy insurance, but Justice Samuel Alito dismissed this as a “small” concern.

Perhaps he only thinks it’s small, Begala says, “because as a government employee his health-care bills are paid by We the People.” Indeed, the ones in charge of the nation’s health-care policy enjoy remarkable health-care themselves.

As Congress furiously debates the so-called Buffett Rule, a liberal election-year stunt which would up millionaires’ tax rates to thirty percent, I watch and shrug. Between my federal, state and local taxes as a self-employed person, thirty percent is about what I pay. As a freelance journalist, I suspect that that 30% hits me a little harder than it would hit Presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who paid about 15% last year on his $250 million fortune. I’m putting off grocery shopping till my next check arrives, and he’s installing an elevator for his cars in his $12 million villa.

But when I pay my taxes every quarter, I imagine myself paying for police and traffic lights and sidewalks and Grampa’s social security, and I don’t mind too much.

Congress and the Supreme Court Justices apparently have no problem with requiring us to pay taxes. Since our taxes support their top-notch health-care plans, I guess the principle is this: it’s ok to require me to pay for YOUR health-care, but heaven forbid I be required to pay for my own.

When I whined intemperately about my woes on Facebook this week, a friend replied sharply with her own suggestions, including getting family to lend money for my care, or pawning my belongings. Or I could “register as poor and go to a free clinic.” She also suggested going to Canada or England so I could get my care for free.

My generous parents have helped me to get care when things were really desperate, but that’s not a sustainable solution, and I’m an adult who doesn’t want to ask. I do have some nice wedding gifts stashed away – maybe a lovingly given crystal pitcher could pay for a round or two of meds, but the thought makes me sad. I bet a free clinic could patch me up if I sprained an ankle, but even experienced practitioners frequently know nothing about my medical condition – it’s not very common and is poorly understood. I respectfully doubt that a free clinic is equipped to deal with me. Maybe another country would take me in, but airfare’s pretty expensive. Plus, on a system-wide level, I bet taxpayers in those countries wouldn’t view my care as “free”.

I do deserve a lecture, for making such a public show of my problems while also shooting down well-meant suggestions. But I’m writing this because I bet many people can relate to my situation, and no-one – from my Facebook friends to my doctor, who recommends physical therapy at $100-$400 a month (from a practitioner who does not take insurance at all) – has provided a viable answer.

Good luck, Supreme Court. You could never trust me to figure this out, and besides, I have enough to worry about.

The Sunday Poll: Sex Scandals and Politics

June 12, 2011

I have a recurring nightmare in which I watch CNN break an Obama sex scandal.

I think there are two reasons for this.

#1) Like many other kids of my generation, Clinton’s impeachment trial was my introduction to politics (what could the President possibly have spilled on Monica’s dress to cause such a fuss?) I was more affected by that circus than I knew at the time, and I have a fundamental dread of seeing it play out again.

#2) I care about my country and fellow citizens, and if Obama was ever caught in the smallest sexual indiscretion, we’d be utterly paralyzed until global warming, terrorists or Medicare payments killed us all.  (Also Rush Limbaugh would explode with glee and his toxic innards would melt our faces off).

Clinton. Spitzer. Vitter. Sanford. Foley. Edwards. Craig. Schwarzenegger. Weiner (to name a few). Politicians’ sex scandals are as perennial as highway construction back-ups and almost as annoying. Let’s put aside the question of why they do it (I’m sick of the pontification on the soullessness  of powerful white males following the Dominique Strauss-Kahn debacle): as Weiner’s dirty photos saturate the media today, the politician whose sex scandal will break sometime in July is probably disrobing in front of his iPhone right now while Weiner’s apology plays on the office TV.

I’m more interested in the question of whether these scandals really do render someone unfit for government office. The current speculation on GOP Presidential candidates has brought this question into sharper focus, as pundits discard Gingrich as a viable contender because of his marital history, and Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels refuses to run, we speculate, because his wife left him for another dude before returning to marry Daniels again. Newsweek polled Republican-leaning voters for a recent feature on the qualities desired in the “perfect” GOP candidate. Of 30 listed qualities, “Morally Unimpeachable” is number two, beating out “shrewd legislator” (number six) and “clear set of political beliefs” (number 19). Of course, as Weiner and countless others prove, political sex scandals are by no means limited to Republicans (though Democrats more often at least escape the label of overt hypocrite, that most dreaded of American epithets, because they haven’t devoted their careers to opposing gay rights or defending the sanctity of marriage).

My parents’ explanation of Clinton’s failure made a big impression on me. “Always remember that the Oval Office belongs to all Americans, including you,” they said. “Presidents have a responsibility to use it respectfully.” Even more ominously, they added, “how can a person keep any promises to his country, if he can’t even keep a promise to his wife?”

Solid point.

But as life has become an unending parade of lawmakers hounded from their posts for illicit sexual liaisons, and otherwise interesting or competent Presidential candidates won’t seek the nomination because their marital history is less than perfect, I think we have a problem. Of course, some scandals do give legitimate grounds for an ouster or legal action – solicitation of minors or sexual harassment, for instance. Even when a scandal seems like it’s purely limited to the politician’s sordid personal life, as in cases of simple adultery or illegitimate children, investigators rush to prove that campaign or office funds were somehow used to further the affair, rendering the politician’s actions not just unsavory but illegal. But how many of these politicians unfairly suffer the death of their professional credentials because of personal faults? Who among us doesn’t have something in our romantic or sexual past we wouldn’t want others to know?

Perhaps the never-ending pageant of political sex scandals inures my sense of outrage when the latest sexter or prostitute-frequenter declares how very sorry he is. Maybe I don’t care as much as I should. But I don’t understand why politicians’ personal indiscretion, like an extramarital affair or ill-judged text messages, should consume our attention. Surely there are better uses for our money and media, when the US faces a crisis on every side.

I live my life by certain standards, and abide by my marriage vows. But I’m not consumed when others do not, and lately I feel like I’m in the minority. I see many of these politicians the same way I see co-workers whose ill-advised sex or intra-office infidelity comes to light.  We don’t have to be best friends. But I don’t doubt their ability to continue doing their jobs.

And so we come to the poll. (Finally).

I’m not saying that we should become like the Italians, tolerating years of Silvio Berlusconi. But I think that if Newsweek Republicans were to find their “Morally Unimpeachable” candidate, they’d have to nominate someone who is not of this earth. And that’s probably why I’ll keep on having that nightmare.

 

 

The Sunday Poll: Do You Want Palin to Run for President?

May 28, 2011

Since every news outlet is salivating over whether Sarah is really going to run, I thought I’d join in by soliciting my readers’ opinions. This poll has more options than usual, but since this is such a vital, multifaceted issue, I wanted to do it justice.

Do you not find your opinion covered in the poll options? By all means, enlighten us in the comments.

And Now, A Serious Blog Entry for September 11th: the Problem with the Polls

September 10, 2010

I am thinking about the 9-year anniversary of the September 11th attacks. Since I am Alaina Mabaso, I can commandeer this blog for whatever I want to talk about, even if it’s not funny. I’m not Jon Meacham or a similar king of political pontificators in print. This is just one tiny blog, but maybe I’ll feel better for getting this off my chest.

I’m pretty annoyed with you, fellow Americans. I can’t believe the religion-based acrimony of the past month. Muslims! Christians! Both living in America! There’s the flap over a Muslim community center a couple blocks away from Ground Zero. A New York man stabs a cab driver because the driver is Muslim. The pastor of a Florida church stokes a media hurricane by declaring he’s going to mark September 11th by torching the Koran. But I haven’t gotten to my real point yet. The thing that may have gotten under my skin the most is the tumult over some recent poll results: a growing percent of Americans think Barack Obama is a Muslim! Condescending liberal writers are taking every opportunity to excoriate the pathetic Tea Party conservatives who think that Obama is about to impose Sharia law from Wasilla to the Dove World Outreach Center. Even Jon Meacham takes his last-ever editorial at the helm of Newsweek Magazine to convince us that those Muslim rumors about Obama are patently false:  every scrap of real evidence proves that our President is a Christian.  Did you see his Oval Office address a few months ago about the BP disaster in the Gulf, in which he exhorted us to have faith and trust in a higher power to bring us through this crisis? No-one who saw it could doubt that our President is very devout – or smart enough to know that to keep faith with his voters, he must appear to be so.

And that’s the thing that just might bother me the most as we exult in our American spirit nine years after terrorists destroyed the Twin Towers. Every hyperventilating column I’ve read repudiating rumors of Obama being a Muslim has missed the real tragedy of the Obama-is-a-Muslim polls, especially as this grim anniversary makes us reflect on the essence of being an American.The shame isn’t that many impatient, economically battered Americans can’t process the fact that Obama’s been a member of a Christian church for decades. The shame is that even the most liberal writers in our mainstream media will not say that our President’s religion should not determine our opinion of his work in office. Going to a temple, church or mosque can be a beautiful part of private life. But in a country that is supposed to pride itself on tolerance, a secular government and freedom of religion, I am embarrassed to be an American when editorials on religion and politics do nothing more than blare that our President is a good Christian, not one of those Muslims.

Perhaps I just have a terminal, useless case of How-Would-I-Feel-If-I-Were-Them. I ride the bus with Muslim families every day and I think to myself how I’d feel if most journalists were falling all over themselves to prove that our elected President was not a member of my religion and therefore still worthy of the public’s support. Perhaps America really is meant to be a Judeo-Christian country where all other religions will be relegated to sites of an appropriate distance – a country where faith in God is a necessary plank in political platforms, and Presidential addresses advise us to pray in the face of a preventable environmental and economic catastrophe. But what if this is not the country we meant to build? Instead of working ourselves into frenzy over polls on what religion our President practices, why does no-one say that his religion should have nothing to do with our respect for his office? Almost a decade after terrorists demonstrated the worst kind of religious extremism, we are still failing to live up to the tolerance we espouse.

Thanks for your ear. And Alaina Mabaso’s Blog will be updated this weekend with the humor you’ve been led to expect.

The Case For Confiscating Fries on the Bus, and other adult responsibilities

April 22, 2010

A recent story in the news spotlighted a high school in Rhode Island which graduates less than half of its students. Just over half of Central Falls High School’s students are proficient readers, and just 7% are proficient in math. The Superintendant and the school board asked the teachers’ union to make some changes, including paid tutoring and two weeks of paid teacher training in the summer, as well as eating lunch with the kids once a week. The kids in Central Falls could use the help – most of them are very poor and many struggle with English as a second language.

The teachers’ union refused the changes. So the school board voted to fire the Central Falls High School teachers.

The aftermath rippled through the national media, culminating with President Obama citing Central Falls in a speech on education and declaring, “If a school continues to fail its students year after year after year, if it doesn’t show signs of improvement, then there’s got to be a sense of accountability.” He surprised many by provoking teachers’ unions, a longtime Democratic stronghold. The question is gripping the country. Should teachers’ pay and status be tied to their students’ success?

I saw a cartoon commenting on the controversy. In it, a goonish, drooling kid with a finger up his nose holds a textbook upside down, a pencil through his ears. “Would you want this person to determine your salary and benefits?” the caption asks.

I admit, I am renowned in my circles as what my mother calls a “child scrooge”. I often find the behavior of kids noisy and disconcerting.  But I found that cartoon’s implication repugnant: that kids struggle at school because they’re cretins, and the teachers can’t do anything about it.

I get a similar feeling about a story that’s closer to home: troubling incidents in Philadelphia known as “flash mobs” – late night swarms of hundreds of teenagers who sometimes just block the traffic, and sometimes do worse, like assaulting bystanders and looting stores. Amidst the furor to arrest the troublemakers and charge them with adult crimes, and the handwringing over the dark side of the social networking sites supposedly behind the gatherings, I’m anxious over something different. Do hundreds of city parents either not know or not care about where their kids are late at night?

The fact is, it’s just as easy to demonize kids and teens for problems that involve them as it is to demonize any group of people when you face an issue with an us vs. them mindset. Of course, the problems involving kids are numerous. Recently, I shopped in a department store with my mother. There was another mother-daughter pair nearby, although that daughter was about 22 years younger than I. As I quietly combed the racks of denim, the 4-year-old’s wails rose like the relentless chatter of a cicada plague over a sleepy forest. “Mommmy! Mommmy! Mommmy! Mommmy!” she cried. “I’m tired! I want to go home! Mommmmy!” She oozed out of her stroller and collapsed on the carpet. It was beyond irritating. But as I faced a sea of “perfectly slimming” jeans and khakis, I knew that I felt just like she did. Perhaps the only real difference between the four-year-old and me is that she has yet to master accepted social inhibitions, like the one that keeps me from weeping and prostrating myself like a squid washed up on the floor of the mall.

A wonderful banjo player gathers a small crowd in the train station – but only the two-year-old is dancing. A 9-year-old boy hears a long-winded speaker say she will conclude shortly. “Finally!” he moans, audible to all present. Don’t we all sometimes wish we could start a dance party in the train station or whine loudly and roll our eyes when someone drones on too long? Kids’ behavior reminds me not of their bizarre differences from my adult self, but of our native similarities – before the unfettered expression of those universal human joys and exasperations are ironed out of us by politeness.

Maybe it’s just my skeptical personality, but I’m constantly surprised by the trusting nature of small children. Recently a friend asked me to supervise his little girl while he stepped out of the room. The child promptly tumbled and hit her head. She had never met me before, but when I picked her up she burrowed into my lap. This is, perhaps, something else we lose or suppress as adults: a native desire to trust and rely on others emotionally and physically. For most people, this trust is replaced with a wariness of others that emphasizes our autonomy and intellect as adults. But if we connected more to that childlike faith in others, we might realize that the bad, ungovernable, unteachable qualities we see in kids, whether they’re failing math or running in a flash mob, are human traits we all should have some responsibility for.

I don’t think kids are challenging to teach because they’re kids, a different species from my adult self. I think they’re challenging to teach because they’re human beings whose inhibitions and personal accountability aren’t in place. What could be more challenging than molding someone else who has all the same human failings you do – unmasked by your practiced patience and tact?

I rode the bus last month with a mom and her daughter, who was probably about three. The child slumped sideways like a rag doll in the large seat. “Sit up! Sit up the right way!” Her mother said. The child faced forward and stuck her legs out in front of her, her ankles reaching just beyond the edge of the grown-up seat. It reminded me of kids in school. They might get specially sized desks and chairs, but school is still an eight-hour workday. If I can’t wait for five o’clock, how does an eight-year-old feel?

The little girl on the bus clutched a wrinkled McDonald’s bag. She plunged her hand in for a French fry. “We don’t eat that on the bus!” Mom swept the bag away. The child immediately gave into some of the most acute grief I’ve ever seen at close range. She slumped as if she had received a fatal wound in battle and sobbed into the seat. I considered moving to higher ground as the snot coursed down her chin. Couldn’t mom just cede the fries for the sake of everyone else on the bus?

“Are you going to have a tantrum now?” the mother asked.

“No,” she wept.

“Well, are you going to close your mouth?”

“I…don’t…waaaant…to….close….it!”

“Sit up properly! Right now!” Mom was returning to basics.

Through her paroxysms, the girl hauled herself upright. “I want my friiiiiiies!”

“We don’t eat them on the bus.”

It took only about six blocks for the tempest to wane. The little girl wiped her tears, crawled into the next seat and wrapped her arms around her mother. I heard a faint crinkle of paper and the mother seized a small, questing hand. “You’re trying to reach those fries!” The child squealed in delight at her own cleverness as the mother wiped her nose on an unworn sweatshirt.

Children are as stubborn and whiny and wily as…well, as any grown-up person is tempted to be. Would I like someone to order me not to eat my very own French fries? I’m human – of course I wouldn’t like it.  But I’d probably yell and cry about it only if no-one had ever taught me I that shouldn’t. One of our most important jobs as adults is to inculcate in kids the sensibility and the accountability that makes the grown-up world function. The 15-year-old in the flash mob is not the only one who is responsible for his behavior. The lessons on sitting up straight, not eating on the bus and shutting your mouth may accumulate agonizingly (for all involved) on a hundred tragically French fry-less rush hour buses, or (as we can hope becomes a reality in the American education system) in a million classrooms where the extraordinary people who choose to teach persevere for their students, seeing a class full of young human beings, not a problem demographic for which adults are not responsible. Those insufferable kids aren’t aliens. They’re people who just haven’t learned what I’ve learned.

These Are a Few of My Favorite Things

February 22, 2010

Commuting on snowy sidewalks and slogging through work while sick for the sake of my anemic bank account do not inspire a rosy view of the world. In fact, negative thoughts slid into my demoralized mind just like the city’s snow-slush pools into a treacherous mini-glacier where the sidewalk dips to the street.  When the barely-plowed streets are piled with gritty, blackened snow and I’m getting through the day on Advil and Halls, I realize that there are a lot of things to hate in this world. Dwelling on them is the best part of the day, and also the best way to realize that, hard as it might be to believe, some women have it worse than I do.

For example, instead of having a stylish young husband and five goldfish in a quiet apartment, I could be the mother on a kid-factory reality show, single-handedly birthing an Arkansas army for God with a man named Jim Bob. Despite their egregious license in matters of reproduction, I had vaguely felt the Duggars of “19 Kids and Counting” relatively benign, despite their apparent belief that the Bible says a woman shalt not have a moment of the day (or marital night) to herself. But recently I read an item about a little girl who almost choked to death at the Duggars’ car dealership. Apparently, one Duggar called 911 and helped the EMTs, and another grabbed his cell phone camera so the tragic incident could be properly filmed.  I’m also looking at you, Jon and Kate. Instead of getting married, conceiving a reasonable portion of the next generation, and striving to be decent parents, you engineered yourselves a human litter and then exploited that litter so that every theme-park meltdown and proud little poo is broadcast to the world. Has anyone in the history of the whole human race ever suffered a loss of privacy as profound as the Gosselin kids have, who were TV fodder before they left the NICU? And then Jon and Kate proceeded to blow up their marriage in a tabloid bonanza, all the while claiming that the exclusive magazine cover stories on their own exquisite pain were done for the sake of the children. And as for Octomom Nadya Suleman, it’s a classic “chicken or the egg”: did she birth 14 tots with no means of support so she could land a human litter reality show, or did excessive viewing of human litter reality shows lead her to birth 14 tots?

Speaking of the dangers inherent in packs of half-grown children – teenaged skateboarders should be consigned to ranches in Montana. They flout posted laws wherever they feel like hanging out, and they usually feel like hanging out around a center city bus stop at rush hour. There, harking to nothing but the haphazard, rumbling zoom of their wheels, they show not the slightest awareness of how close they come to running down the grown-ups trying to board and exit the bus. And for what? None of their attempted jumps ever, ever works, and the sidewalk rings with the sharp wooden clatter of skateboards landing between oversized sneakers, puffy as mushrooms on the ends of skin-tight jeans. Why do they have to bring their mayhem to center city? Isn’t there a skateboarding app for the iPhone they could play in their dad’s kitchen?

Skateboarders are not the only thing which should be kept out of the public sphere – there is something I hate even more.  America is a wonderful land where you are entitled to believe what you want. If you want your children to grow up in execrable ignorance, if you want them to deny vibrant, fascinating truth as godless nihilism, and if you think God can only be found in the rapidly shrinking gaps of our human knowledge, then by all means, be a creationist. Rot your kids’ minds with “Of Pandas and People” and pray for the hell-bound Darwinists. But don’t push your fundamentalist religious agenda onto other citizens in the realm of public schools. Every faith has a creation myth which holds a human and spiritual allegory. But tell me why some Americans believe the Christian creation story should be taught as an “alternative” to science in public schools. Why are creationists, including some people who are purportedly fit for public office, willfully blind to some of the world’s most interesting, well-founded facts, and why do they want to force their faith on other Americans’ children as scientific truth? There should be a law. Oh, right. Thank God. There is.

If I made the laws things would be different, particularly during intermission, and by different, I mean much, much better. At intermission, men breeze in and out, blithe as frogs popping in and out of their own personal pond. But the ladies’ room is a crammed, paper towel-ripping tumult of flushes as the lucky ones who beat the line try to squeeze out the same doorway which is packed by the queue. Most theatre companies in Philadelphia compound the problem with rickety, warren-like passages to the bathroom, horrible slatted saloon-style doors that lock with a single rusted hook-and-eye latch, and water-stained print-outs advising all concerned that the simmering toilets are very temperamental and shouldn’t be flushed in quick succession. The fact that men and women are offered restrooms of equal size is one of the blatant inequities still facing western females, and if Obama cared about me at all he’d leave off that tired equal pay crap and send some stimulus dollars to double the number of ladies’ rooms in America.

I could go on – actually, I already have: see the archives for my feelings on centipedes, cilantro, and New Jersey gas stations. I’m beginning to wonder if this blog site is anything other than a conduit for my most grievous exasperations. But I do feel lighter for having shared my woes with you, on all counts, so thanks. I realize that you may not hate the same things that I do. You might even hate blog entries that lack a discernable narrative or theme.  But don’t hate me for trying to pull something together when I’m grumpy, sick, and tired of the snow.

NOW FIND ALAINA MABASO’S BLOG ON FACEBOOK!


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 866 other followers