Digby had a couple of interesting posts up over the weekend about the ugly, racist reaction to Obama’s win.  The first was a piece about a couple in Arkansas that owns a hotel and has run up the Confederate flag where they used to have the American flag to protest the election of a black President.  Of course, they deny that their intentions are racist---it’s not that he’s black, he’s a bunch of dog whistles and code words to indicate that he’s black.  There’s a difference, you know.  He’s infected with The Socialism, which they probably think manifests itself by darkening your pigmentation. (Why not?  As Digby points out, these people don’t really grasp what “socialism” means in any realistic way.  It’s a provocative word that means whatever the person spitting it out wants it to mean, making it a perfect code word for racist slurs that they can’t use in public anymore.) To prove this point, Digby reminds everyone that similar terms were used precisely as a polished racial slurs by none other than Jesse Helms when he was giving his reasons for opposing the MLK holiday. 

Asked before television cameras to say whether he considered King a “Marxist-Leninist,” as he had suggested earlier on the Senate floor, Helms at first demurred, then said, “But the old saying--if it has webbed feet, if it has feathers and it quacks, it’s a you-know-what.” Asked again later if he considered King a Marxist, Helms said, “I don’t think there is any question about that.”

Being cute about it is one of those wingnut traits that probably grates on me the most.  Dancing around your racism and winking at the world you think agrees with you isn’t cute or funny.  Really, it’s just another strategy for wingnuts to convince themselves they’re an oppressed minority.  The Resistance has to speak in code language, wouldn’t you know?  But they’re not, really---this Arkansas couple and Helms aren’t actually trying to hide their opinions from you.  They’re trying to make it very clear what they think without coming right out and saying it, because if they did that, they couldn’t play the victim. 

Anyway, a reader of Digby’s wrote a great email explaining that to white Southern racists and their allies who hang the Confederate flag in non-Confederate states, the flag has always represented Christian values, honor, freedom, hating commies, puppies and kittens.  As someone who lives in one of the Confederate states, I can also attest to the fact that some morons still call it The Rebel Flag, as if it’s some symbol of a strike for justice and freedom, instead of the reality, that it was a strike against freedom for enslaved people.* The reason that puppies and kittens have been attached to the Confederate flag is for the same reason that homobigots have to paint their opposition to gay marriage as “protecting traditional marriage” and their ancestors who protested interracial marriage claimed that god separated the races for a reason---because no one wants to admit they’re a straight-up bigot.  It’s always something else. 

However, what this does to bigots is that it aligns whiteness with honor, freedom, and perhaps puppies and kittens, and so they get into this mindset where they begin to really believe that black people can’t own puppies or kittens.  But more to the point, it also means that bigots are stuck in this loop where they can’t even imagine that Obama is not a communist, because in their binary system that’s like saying water isn’t wet. 

What’s changed for the hardened bigots is that their winking and nudging belief that they’re speaking for “real” Americans has just been dealt a serious blow.  If they’re really the majority, then no way could Obama have won, full stop.  All this silly discussion about how America is a “center-right” country that’s aimed precisely at reducing the impact of this historic election isn’t going to be much comfort to the wingnutteria.  They’re not really part of that kind of discussion---it’s all about race and the mythical atheists (as opposed to the real ones who don’t have horns and tails) and taking away your guns and being forced to marry someone of your own sex and abortion doctors knocking at your door to tell you that your mother changed her mind 40 years after the fact.  It’s a fantasy world, in other words, and it was just introduced to some serious reality. 

One thing that was interesting about the letter I want to highlight in light of the upcoming “War On Christmas” panic is this:

In addition to white supremacy and foaming at the mouth anti-communism, the reactionary forces of the south were also dyed-in-the-wool anti-semites.....

Oh, and another particular aspect of that old southern bigotry was that the term “Christian” excluded Catholics, who could not be trusted because of their fealty and obedience to Rome, a foreign, and thus suspect, influence. It was quite a feat of cognitive dissonance to lump Jews and Catholics in with the godless Communists, as the right wing in Europe had only managed to lump together the first two as the common subject of their conspiracy theories.

Obviously, the Republican leadership is trying to replace “Jews” with “atheists” as the major threat, but I’m not so certain that the workaday and aging wingnutteria distinguishes too well between the two.  There’s been a genuine effort to eradicate antisemitism from the wingnut pantheon of prejudice, and I think it’s for genuinely cynical reasons, which is to get the racist, weak-minded base behind Israel.  You know, instead of rejecting antisemitism because it’s wrong. But dragging up the fake “War On Christmas” every year doesn’t, I suspect, do much for the cause of shutting down antisemitism, because it’s so rooted in hostility towards a Jewish population that doesn’t celebrate Christmas.  In general, you see an attempt to take old antisemitic stereotypes and just slide “atheists” into the slot where “Jews” used to be.  For instance, now it’s the “atheist” ACLU.  But if you’re willing to boil your computer and use Google to do a little searching, you’ll see some wingnuts are still holding out for the old labels.

The weirdest part of this whole thing is that while the wingnuts changed the “War On Christmas” villain from Jews to atheists, they didn’t really update any aspects of the panic so they made more sense.  It’s not just that a lot of atheists still celebrate Christmas, since most American atheists are still rooted in that cultural heritage.  Really, for an atheist from a Christian background, the question is “Christmas or no Christmas?”, not “Christmas or a generic ‘holidays’?” I fail to see how the panic over the term “Happy Holidays” makes sense unless you’re angry at minority religions that have different winter holidays, the biggest one being Hanukkah.  (True, everyone celebrates New Year’s Eve, but getting mad because people roll up that holiday in with the others also doesn’t make sense.) All this is just something to keep in mind as we go forward, that the vein of antisemitism hasn’t been pried from racism, homophobia, sexism, and red panicking as easily as some on the right would like to believe. 

*While Texas schools have mostly gotten away from the old-fashioned Southern way of teaching this history by claiming that the North were the aggressors and Southerners were innocent babes, they haven’t, as far as I know, rectified the tradition of glossing over the fact that the Texas war of independence was a practice run for the Confederacy.  Yep, Texas declared independence because Mexico outlawed slavery.  And won the war in fairly short order, no less, so no wonder the Confederate states thought it would be easy-peasy to do that.  But considering that one of the Confederate states had already gone through this process, the claim that Southerners thought they could leave peacefully is a joke. 

For the man who is leaving national and international wreckage strewn about, this is incredible. And to top it off, the award will be presented by megachurch pastor Rick Warren. (nope, not The Onion, but via Christian Newswire):

President George W. Bush will be presented with the “International Medal of PEACE” by Dr. Rick Warren on behalf of the Global PEACE Coalition during the Saddleback Civil Forum on Global Health, to be held at the Newseum in Washington, on the 20th anniversary of World AIDS Day, Dec. 1.  This award is in recognition of the President’s tireless efforts and unprecedented contribution to the fight against HIV/AIDS and other diseases.

“No world leader has done more for global health than President Bush,” Warren said. “The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief [PEPFAR] has saved millions of lives in the past five years, so it is fitting that he be awarded the first ‘International Medal of PEACE.’

...The “International Medal of PEACE” is given to honor outstanding contribution toward alleviating the five “global goliaths” – giant problems negatively impacting society worldwide, including pandemic diseases, extreme poverty, illiteracy, corruption and injustice and spiritual emptiness. The PEACE Coalition is a network of churches, businesses and individuals cooperating together to solve humanitarian issues through the PEACE Plan, an effort to mobilize millions of Christians to Promote reconciliation, Equip servant leaders, Assist the poor, Care for the sick and Educate the next generation. 

The inevitable post-Black Friday stories report that while it wasn’t as bad as it could have been, spending was way down and profits even more down.  Being reflexively liberal, I have a scoffing “so what” reaction, but I know that this isn’t so great, realistically speaking.  Black Friday is not, as it’s often presumed, the biggest shopping day of the year, but it’s a good indicator of what the season is going to look like.  And it’s not good. 

But while the crowds did come out, analysts say they were thinner than last year, and according to some accounts, business fell off sharply for the remainder of the weekend.

Shoppers were also focused on bargains and smaller-ticket, practical items like blenders and video games, as they worry about layoffs, tightening credit and shrinking retirement funds.

Here’s what’s sick about the whole thing---it wasn’t good, but spending is still up.  That’s our economy for you---so growth-oriented that you don’t even need to shrink for there to be a problem.  It’s bad if you simply don’t grow at a ridiculously huge rate.  I fail to see how anyone could observe this attitude and think that we were facing anything but disaster.  I have to wonder if the economic crunch is going to affect how people view their own consumption, because right now the trend for cheap, throwaway goods tends to overwhelm everything, including the electronics market.  (I think some people don’t even really care if electronic goods fry out and have to be replaced frequently---means you know what to buy people for Christmas.) What I would be interested in is seeing if gift choices trend towards economy.  For instance, a video game might be expensive, but on the whole, it’s frugal if you play the game a lot.  You can get a lot more use out of a $50 video game than spending the same amount on movies, for instance.  And more buying things that people would have to buy themselves is someone didn’t get it for them, like clothes.  I know I asked my mom for clothes this year, because I want stuff I will absolutely use.

I’m not inclined to beat my chest over the tragic materialism of American culture on display this time of year.  Americans didn’t invent gift-giving, even though we do take it to dizzying levels.  But I do think the spirit of generosity is a good one, and I definitely have a tendency to get excited over giving someone I love a gift that I think they’ll really like.  I can’t wave my hands over that and declare it merely a symptom of materialism invented by capitalists---giving gifts is primal, probably residing in our DNA.  Functionally, what’s hard about gift-giving is picking something out that someone else will like.  Christmas and birthdays are often a painful reminder of how little individuality we each have, because it is so often hard to find a gift that will please a person without being generic.  But it’s hard to be innovative without running the risk they won’t like it. 

I’m an early starter, so I’m basically done with my Christmas list, but I sort of wish I wasn’t, because the economic crunch made me realize that the “hard times” theme might be a good one to arrange your shopping list around.  Vow to make all your gifts something that will last for a person, or a replacement for something they’d have to buy themselves, or something that will save them money, like crafting materials or classes in crafting.  But we’re in this recession for awhile, so there’ll be time next year.

At Feministing, I saw that Planned Parenthood is giving out gift cards, which I can’t say that I’d buy because that’s a tad too unsentimental.  (Yay! A pap smear!  What I always wanted!) Of course, this is controversial, and the excuse for being upset is that you could use the money towards an abortion, if that’s what you need.  But I doubt anyone is buying one with that in mind (it’s probably more “one month free birth control” that’s motivating purchases), but let’s face it---even if they made you openly borrow the money from a friend for an abortion, that wouldn’t stop people from bitching about this.  Because giving your (likely female) friend a gift certificate from Planned Parenthood is, in the eyes of social conservatives, suggesting she has a right to have sex punishment-free, and that’s controversial enough.  Wonder what they’d think about gift certificates to Good Vibrations, which are more fun but send the same message? 

Feel free to share your ideas for “hard times” gifts in comments.  I’m sure that good suggestions will be helpful to people like me who often have trouble thinking of really good gifts.

On Friday over at my pad in an open thread I said this:

I’m packing up for the flight home tomorrow (oy, please let the Philly airport not be a hellhole).

Well...Saturday my brother dropped me off and PHL and USAir lost my bag AGAIN. Kate’s arrived safely. Go figure.

Four people on my flight lost their baggage, with it either coming on an earlier flight, or not arriving at all. In fact, the USAir baggage person who took my claim said she had several on Saturday, all but one on the RDU-PHL routes. There’s really no excuse for this kind of sh*tty customer service, and the PHL reputation is bad.

More below the fold, including a travel Q of the day.

The big problem, at least in the case of USAir is that the terminal for the Express brand is way the hell away from the main USAir terminal. So if you check in at F, there’s a possibility you could end up with a gate at C. If so, you can check in and through security at F and walk to C, where you have to go through security again, or walk to C, check in and go through security once.

I’ve done both and they’ve lost my bags twice, so I guess the peeps there can’t figure out how to transport bags. And it doesn’t seem to matter whether it’s busy or not—the last time it was a late flight and there were no lines.

And this time we arrived about 4 hours ahead of time (my brother’s sister-in-law had an earlier flight, so we just went early to save another trip to the airport).

The airline said my bag might be on the 5PM flight and it will eventually be delivered to my house. We’ll see.

Oh, and yes, despite the drop in fuel prices, you still have to pay $15/bag on USAir if you want to check it, and the airline is now charging an outlandish $2 for water and soft drinks. When the flight attendants rolled out the cart, there were practically no takers for beverages. I wonder if they give you the whole can for that price, or whether you get the tiny plastic cup with a half-glass.

Any 2008 travel war stories out there?

BTW, my bag arrived late last night. They left it on the front porch without ringing the bell. I had left a note out there as instructed (if we weren’t home, then they would leave it), even though I knew we would be home all evening. WTF? Kate just happened to open the door before going to bed and saw the bag was there.

No lie. Boy this party is in more trouble than I thought. Now that the bloom is off of the Sarah Palin rose, apparently GOP movers and shakers are ready to gamble on the governor of Louisiana. Must be that whole diversity thing nagging at them. Sorry pals, he’s still a fundie.

Like the president-elect, Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana is young (37), accomplished (a Rhodes scholar) and, as the son of Indian immigrants, someone familiar with breaking racial and cultural barriers. He came to Iowa to deliver a pair of speeches, and his mere presence ignited talk that the 2012 presidential campaign has begun here, if coyly. Already, a fierce fight is looming between him and other Republicans—former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, who arrived in Iowa a couple of days before him, and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who is said to be coming at some point—for the hearts of social conservatives.

..."The Republicans really have no choice except to look at some people more youthful if they want to have a better chance of winning,” said Betty E. Johnson, an independent and the wife of a Cedar Rapids pastor, who voted for George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004 but who went for Obama over 72-year-old John McCain. “I liked Obama’s energy and hope. I don’t know, but maybe a younger person would give Republicans a feeling of more energy, openness.”

Exactly—a feeling of more openness. It takes more than being born in the last half of the century to actually project a nod to diversity and openness, but whatever, the GOP is all about imagery and imagination rather than reality. Look at the sea of pale old folks who attended its convention. But I guess fronting is about as good as the Republicans can do.

....Meanwhile, others around the country were talking him up. No less an aspiring kingmaker than Steve Schmidt, the chief strategist of McCain’s failed presidential bid, sees Jindal as the Republican Party’s destiny. “The question is not whether he’ll be president, but when he’ll be president, because he will be elected someday.” The anti-tax crusader Grover Norquist believes, too, that Jindal is a certainty to occupy the White House, and conservative talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh has described him as “the next Ronald Reagan.”

..."If anything, McCain’s candidacy suggests that age is not always a positive—and sometimes is a negative,” Norquist says. “As Republicans, you have a real problem now with younger voters and immigrants. If you were going to central casting for a candidate to deal with all that, who do you have? Jindal. He is young, and he looks young. . . . He’s a great communicator. And his record is that he’s sharp and quick with policy.”

Jindal supporters regularly evoke the Reagan parallel, fueled by a confidence that their hero’s brand of social and fiscal conservatism, coupled with his sunny folksiness on the stump, can rekindle the Reagan flame.

Wait—Reagan!? I thought that Sarah Palin was the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan, according to his son Michael:

Wednesday night I watched the Republican National Convention on television and there, before my very eyes, I saw my Dad reborn; only this time he’s a she...Welcome back, Dad, even if you’re wearing a dress and bearing children this time around.

Anyway, this bit of business below the fold is the nugget to pay attention to…

Jindal is his own invention, in the mold of an Obama. Born in Louisiana as Piyush Jindal to highly educated immigrants from India, he decided as a young child to nickname himself “Bobby,” after his favorite character on the TV show “The Brady Bunch.” Raised as a Hindu, he converted to Catholicism while in college and later wrote a lengthy, intimate story that provided a window on his religious evolution, in a manner that fairly calls to mind Obama’s books about his own grappling with issues of self-identity.

...The record is still evolving, like the rest of him. But social conservatives like what they have heard about the public and private Jindal: his steadfast opposition to abortion without exceptions; his disapproval of embryonic stem cell research; his and his wife Supriya’s decision in 1997 to enter into a Louisiana covenant marriage that prohibits no-fault divorce in the state; and his decision in June to sign into law the Louisiana Science Education Act, a bill heartily supported by creationists that permits public school teachers to educate students about both the theory of “scientific design” and criticisms of Darwinian evolutionary concepts.

Yes, there we are. Nothing new, just a new hue to the same bible based policy promotion by the GOP. No one is going to be fooled by this guy.

Let’s just take a look at some of the fun stuff about Bobby Jindal that was unearthed this cycle and tell me if these posts from the Blend files reflect change or more of the same…

* McCain VP short-lister Bobby Jindal’s exorcist work.

in an essay Jindal wrote in 1994 for the New Oxford Review, a serious right-wing Catholic journal, Jindal narrated a bizarre story of a personal encounter with a demon, in which he participated in an exorcism with a group of college friends. And not only did they cast out the supernatural spirit that had possessed his friend, Jindal wrote that he believes that their ritual may well have cured her cancer.

And more…

* Bobby ‘The Exorcist’ Jindal to let anti-discrimination law expire

* Jindal draws a blank when asked about McCain’s ‘big ideas’

* Bobby ‘Exorcist’ Jindal ready to sign off on stealth creationism bill
* Jindal: intelligent design is legitimate science

UPDATE: One of my readers, JulieWaters, added this graphic in the comments…

In the midst of bemoaning the fact that smart people might be in charge soon, Joseph Epstein says the following:

The assumption here is that having all these good students--many of them possibly “toll-frees,” as high-school students who get 800s on their SATs used to be known in admissions offices--running the country is obviously a pretty good thing.

Good students probably get more than 800 on their SATs.  In fact, I guarantee they do: average non-writing scores on the SAT hover over 1000.  Point taken, though - smarties are so busy scoring hundreds of extra points on standardized tests that they don’t have time to shut their minds off to liberalism. Better to drop out of high school and smash your FM dial, kids.  You’ll thank Joseph later when you’re taking Advanced Christian Bible at Regent University. 

Rod Dreher has stumbled upon the startling realization that old, failing malls usually become the “black mall” before going totally defunct.  And it’s a phenomenon, to his credit, he’s interested in exploring.  Decidedly not to his credit, he doesn’t really want to know the actual reasons, but instead something else entirely:

Here in Dallas, I’ve noticed a similar phenomenon. I’m thinking of a particular mall that has become known as the kind of mall where poor and working-class Mexicans shop, and is on the glide path to defunctitude. If a mall gets known among white people as “the black mall”—or, I suppose, in a regional variation, as “the Mexican mall”—they just won’t go to it. Stuff White People Hate? Right-minded white people will deplore the trend, but the kind of liberal, educated white people who deplore this kind of thing aren’t the kind of white people who would be caught dead actually shopping in the black mall. They’re embarrassed by other white people who won’t shop there, and who don’t feel bad about it.

I wonder if this is a spiral: does a mall start to falter economically, making it accessible to minorities with less money to spend, who frighten middle class white people (and middle class folks of other races) away? If not “frighten,” then serve as a subconscious sign that this mall is in decline, and not where the cool people shop? I know, I know, racism and classism, let us all deplore it and move on. I’m interested in this cultural and economic dynamic.  (emphasis added)

Seriously?  I understand that the revelation of race and class’s impact on society can be a wake-up call, but it’s rare that someone walks right up to it and then scampers away like a scared kitten who got too close to the vacuum cleaner when it came on. 

The issue, of course, is that race and class cut the wrong way when it comes to political ideology, and it doesn’t really make sense that liberal white people would be embarrassed by the lack of other melanin-lacking people around them (in fact, according to the normal conservative shibboleth, liberal whites actually hate and deplore other white people, for a variety of reasons usually related to the fact that they’re always reading Shakespeare instead of Toni Morrison and watching Judge Judy rather than Judge Mathis).  So, what’s going on here?

As racism becomes less acceptable as a societal force, there arises a tendency to play Pass the Shitball - it’s really, really bad to be racist, and as evidenced by the fact that black malls pop up every so often, racism still exists...so how do you embrace reality for a brief second, then shake it off and get back to lamenting the fact that we almost had Pleasantville, but for the dirty hippies who insisted on introducing tongue kissing and park levies?  You blame the hippies for everything!

You see, the “cultural and economic dynamic” here is that there are three functional cultural groups in American society:

1.) Regular white people.
2.) Liberals (who are only white and who are brutally and terribly shallow).
3.) Minorities, who are fooled by liberals’ bling and their patronizing fascination with Kwanzaa, quincineras and The Wire. 

Dreher’s assumption is that Group 1 couldn’t care less about Group 2, and would gladly welcome Group 3 in if it would just stop associating with...those people in Group 2.  These “right-minded white people” who “deplore” this trend have made a perfectly rational, non-racist choice to get the fuck out once the line for new Air Jordans passes the line for the new Eragon book, but the real responsibility for their decision falls on the liberals who don’t civilize the savages, restoring Sbarro’s and Chick-Fil-A to their rightful place and making the faux-cobblestone paths of our local retail mega-establishment safe to once again shop without fear of gang violence or hearing Luther Vandross over the sound system in months other than February.

We’re asked to avoid race and class because they’re secondary to the real “cultural and social issue” of liberals ruining everything.  In turn, this transference and denial is perhaps the most important reason why race and class are such deterministic issues: even in an attempt to shift the scope from the interaction of whites and non-whites at the intersection of commerce, Dreher still fundamentally assumes that it’s all about whitey, and proceeds from his given assumption to a society that’s about little more than what white people decide it’ll be. 

Why do I get the feeling that Dreher’s always first in line at the new white mall?  You know, what with the liberals making him go and all.

The annual tradition has begun---right wing pundits are stirring up shit with their gullible readers by declaring that there’s a “war on Christmas”.  You’d be hard pressed to find a better example than the mythical war on Christmas to demonstrate that culture warriors are a cynical, disingenuous bunch who make up issues to get excited about to distract people from the real Republican war on people who aren’t rich.  That said, I do think that Brent Bozell really is as upset as he comes across in this temper tantrum of a column.  Because the Colbert Report expertly dismantled the scare tactics of the right in the video above---they actually managed to get Toby Keith to sing a song about fighting for the right in the war on Christmas, and it’s hysterical.  It’s so funny, in fact, that it caused Bozell’s anus to constrict violently around the giant stick that’s crammed up there, and I suspect he got splinters.

The lyrics (written by “Daily Show” executive producer David Javerbaum) are not what you would call subtle (or intelligent) about those bullying Christians. The song jokes that idiotic Colbert-clone conservatives think Santa Claus and Uncle Sam are one and the same, “so boys, take aim.” Perhaps this joking about slaying the unbelievers might warm the hearts of those who equate Christians with bloodthirsty Muslim radicals. I’m sure Rosie O’Donnell gives it two thumbs up.

He also goes into a fully frothing freak-out over the use of Willie Nelson in another skit as a pot-smoking wise man in a nativity scene.  Seems like Bozell’s going to have to declare a War On Country Musicians along with a War On Humor and the War On Ass Splinters.  It’s no surprise that Bozell is in a huff over this show, because the more that the disingenuous war on Christmas panic is satirized, the more it loses its punch, which means that culture warriors may have to find a replacement panic to get the intensely gullible all worked up.  Of course, the ostensible reason is that the show is disrespectful to Christianity (and that Colbert must be a closet atheist), because it pokes fun at the silly things that people believe in, like the power of prayer.  And this is Not Suitable For Children, because they day your kids realize it’s cracked for grown adults to believe in angels is the day they quit believing their parents know everything.

This bit of hypocrisy is amusing.

But as usual with satirists, he is cynical and hypocritical.

Satirists have nothing on right wing pundits in the cynical-and-hypocritical department, I’d say.  I can’t think of anything more cynical than pushing the War On Christmas as if it’s a real phenomenon, and nothing more hypocritical than carrying on about morality when you can’t even be bothered to be an honest person.  Really, I’m just in love with that statement, because---and I’m sure that Bozell doesn’t realize this, because he’s that sloppy---he’s implicitly denouncing all satire as inherently distasteful and probably immoral.  Which, to be fair, is probably what any of us would think if we felt that stick up our asses grating uncomfortably against rectal tissue every time we giggled.

Colbert proclaimed a while back on “60 Minutes” that he never lets his children watch his shows, because they don’t get his irony. He just makes them so that everyone else’s children are instructed to laugh along.

And by “children”, Bozell means grown adults.  Because children can be told to turn off the TV and go to bed.  In fact, the rule of thumb when some wingnut is going on about “the children” is that they mean “adults that we can’t control though we think we should have that right”.  They don’t want the world child-proofed so much as asshole-proofed, where they can walk around being giant assholes without ever running the risk that someone will call them out for it. 

Marc and I were planning to go visit his mother for Thanksgiving, but alas, there was a mix-up where she didn’t realize we were coming and we didn’t realize she was flying to Seattle until it was too late.  So we stayed home and had an un-holiday, which is something I love.  Or call it a stay-cation, as someone on Twitter did.  Holiday breaks are, unless you’re a government employee, usually too short and completely dominated by family obligations and other hustle and bustle.  All in all, holidays are not a sufficient break from the everyday for most people, but another round of responsibilities, and perversely a quadrupling of American vices of overconsumption and sloth.  And even Americans who have proper vacations---which are few, since most people’s lean vacation time is eaten up by family obligations if they get it at all---tend to be unable to break the cycle, and spend their vacations over-eating, sitting around, and doing lots of tourist-y shit that’s emotionally unsatisfying but does produce photographs to prove you did it, not that anyone cares.  It’s depressing.

I recommend a stay-cation, if you can get one.  And use it to spend time to sides of yourself that you neglect.  I realized too late yesterday that I could spend this time reorganizing my music collection, but once I started, I was in bliss.  Being a typical American, I couldn’t get away from all my habits, and I read blogs idly while I was actually listening to music that needed to be judged (on or off iTunes), labeled, and sorted, but on the whole, I spent the time doing a lot less reading that I usually do and spent a lot more time listening to music. The book I did read some was Musicophilia by Oliver Sacks, so I was still on-message.  And even though I’ve probably only just sunk the first shovel into what will be a giant process of getting my iTunes where it needs to be, I feel good that I’ve started.  And now I have a system, so it should go faster.

I don’t have much else to say on this but to praise the un-holiday as a way to really use time off to improve your life, instead of watch it slip out of your fingers.  You feel more reset, more rested, more ready to take on the world.  I wish I remembered that more often, actually.  Probably in the spring when the major project that can’t be put off---planting my garden---presents itself.

Every store I’ve ever been to on Black Friday has a pretty simple mechanism called “a line” that allows people to enter stores in a manner that’s not deadly. 

It seems like every year, someone at a Wal-Mart gets trampled in the mad rush for a $2.98 fullscreen copy of Wall Street.  I understand that Wal-Mart’s two main concerns are serving the customer in store and paying their employees fair, livable wages, but have they not heard of the concept of a controlled line?  Best Buy manages this. Target manages this.  Even JoAnne’s Fabrics manages this.  Somehow, the world’s largest retailer hasn’t gotten the message out to all of its subsidiaries that people in a panicked rush to take advantage of a time and quantity-restricted deal might rush through the doors if not controlled.

This certainly doesn’t show the careful consideration and meticulous planning I’ve come to expect of the World’s Greatest Store.  Saddening.

Also, my only Black Friday anecdote - besides the fact that I got through the day managing only to return something, thereby making my contribution to our economy negative twenty-one dollars - is this, from Circuit City:

Man 1, looking at Guitar Hero: World Tour: “I ain’t buying to no game with a microphone, that shit is gay.”

Man 2: “I’m not gonna buy no game that’s gonna make me gay, son.”

(About the return thing: I apologize, President Obama, but I just don’t have the cash.)