so, what do you do?

what do you do when you receive notification that this guy, a registered sex offender, has just moved to and is living in your town? I mean, I honestly believe that, if folks are convicted of a crime and serve their sentence, they should have a right to live their life. They've paid their due and are square with the house. That's what I believe. But is the fact that this guy is even out a failure of the justice system?

Furthermore, I don't want to live in fear of this guy. I want to be able to walk through dark places at 3am and not be looking over my shoulder, fist-of-keys ready. I don't want to have to worry about the women in my life about whom i care deeply. I don't want to be spooked by every little sound when I'm alone. It's my right to live a life relatively free of fear. So, who's left holding the ball here? And how do we protect our community yet still adhere to the rights we value? A complex question, but one that's striking me in a very particular way this Halloween.

Talk about a terribly un-thrilling scare.

I was doing laundry in a rather poorly-lit place on campus this week, and I had just heard about this guy on maine public radio. I was loading my laundry into my car in almost total darkness (the interior light switch on my car isn't flipped on by my driver's side door for some reason), and I heard a noise to my right. When I saw that a man on a bicycle was digging through one of the trash bins nearby, I almost shit myself. There was no one else around and, although I imagine that someone would have heard me had I needed to make a scene, my heart hit the floor of my car for a split second.

I guess all I want to know is: whose responsibility is it to insure that this guy doesn't hurt anyone?
- posted by clare @ 16:07

 
BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

1. I will no longer apologize for doing my job just because other people aren't doing theirs. (in other words, "hey, if you don't respond to my inquiries, I'm going to keep bugging you, and I'm not going to feel bad or insecure about it.")

2. I will make the concerns of underserved, underrepresented, or otherwise discriminated against populations a priority in my daily work (in other words, "i'm going to take meeting minutes on what all of the meeting participants say, not just the boisterous official-seeming men's relatively trivial and [in this case] self-centered concerns.")

3. I will not be embarrassed by the following:
a) the food I bring for lunch
b) my appearance on any given day
c) the fact that I'm a lesbian and, as such, have a lesbian daily life, whatever that means (in other words, i will talk about my partner when other folks talk about their spouses. i'll make sure she's included in the discussion around benefits, insurance, and other employment-related expenses. i'll check people when they make assumptions about my past, my present, and my future life, especially regarding children, income, relationships, parenting, and legal status...and others as they arise.)
d) the fact that i don't have cable

...

yep, I've been thinking...
- posted by clare @ 11:23

 
ack! lies! all lies! why in god's name (and it is, after all) would the vatican say that the HIV virus passes through condoms, when those very same condoms (consistently proven 90% effective in preventing the transmission of the HIV virus) could potentially be saving lives? in my mind, this is tantamount to the vatican saying that folks who have sex (or, i would add, are raped) out of wedlock deserve to contract HIV--and the folks to whom the disease is passed deserve it, too??? ack! ACK!

bad news day all around.

but is Rummy on the way out? my favorite (more or less) part of the interview described here is when Rummy breaks down with: "I said I don't know. Isn't that clear? You don't understand English?" According to the article, Ralph Peters, a former colonel in intelligence and a military analyst, said that the White House isn't "unhappy with the Pentagon, they're unhappy with Rumsfeld and his paladins; [he] is increasingly seen as a liability...Their trouble is if you get rid of him prematurely you make it an admission of failure. If you do it too late you don't get the benefits in time for the election."

here we go a-politic-ing.

and i think i've figured it out: americans have lost so much faith in "regular" politicians that they feel the need to elect folks who reflect not necessarily competence, capability, or intelligence but rather folks who project an image of competence. but that doesn't really explain arnold, or bush, for that matter... but it seems that folks don't really know or care about candidates' histories, voting records, etc. is it possible that they only really care about the image? i guess that would make sense in kindof a reverse way, given the amount of money that's been invested to make candidates look just right.

and it's true that, the more formal education, the greater the percentage liberal. that is, percentages liberal increase as you proceed along a continuum of less to more education. if only the education system in this country were better...
- posted by clare @ 12:07

 
lifted from ann's weblog, check out body & soul's commentary on arnold's "win." makes me even more physically ill.

p.s. that's it! i've had it! i'm going to run for public office because it's right, and it's fair, and i'm competent. i'm tired of being tokenized as a woman, ignored as a queer, and ridiculed as a "liberal" and a feminist. now, if only i could figure out where i might get elected...
- posted by clare @ 09:02

 
but wait--there's more!

do you know any RINOs? i know a few RINOs myself.
- posted by clare @ 12:36

 
...annndddd... Michael Moore has a new book out called Dude, Where's My Country?. i especially like this article's take, although it's a wee bit... depressing... and the reality is a little more complicated (i feel). but i like the use of words like "punk" and "pluck" in it.
- posted by clare @ 12:26

 
hey! Compromise is possible, in this case, between a coalition of environmental activists and a large power company. yay maine!
- posted by clare @ 12:11

 
things are going pretty durned well this week, so i'm not sure what the deal is, but i have this creepy song stuck in my head. the song, by itself, is not so creepy, it's what my brain does with it.

the song is: "Are You Lonesome Tonight?" as sung by Elvis, of course. it first got itself randomly implanted in my brain when i was living on the wrong side of medford square a few months ago... but the way my brain hears it, it sounds like someone is playing it on an old tape player at the other end of a very large, very empty, and otherwise very quiet warehouse. elvis's soft, then loud wavering voice wafts, then booms through the dust and reaches my ears, in my head.

perhaps more disconcerting is the significant portion of the song in which elvis is actually talking to this hypothetical "lonesome" person. it makes the huge space feel even more empty--again, in my head.

who put the tape player there? why am i there? and, more importantly, why is this bizarre-o image stuck in my head on such a lovely day?

and still, elvis's vowels float in rounded sounds on nonexistent air...

Are you looonesome toniiiight?
Do you miss meee toniiiight?
Are you sorry we drifted apaaart?

- posted by clare @ 09:49

 
the quotable arnold: "All I can tell you is if it's Nazi stuff, if it's women's stuff, if it's how I do business, any kinds of these things, it's all about trying to attack me," from this BBC article about the End of the California Race! huzzah!

p.s. attack away, Truth.
- posted by clare @ 16:52

 
i mean, i know i don't have much in common with so-called "NASCAR dads" (except that i'm white... actually, that is quite a bit in common in this country, isn't it? this is assuming that NASCAR dads are primarily white...), but, good GOD man, why do you still want to vote for bush???

i don't believe that "nascar dads" are being duped per se--they make decisions about what and/or whom to believe just like everyone else. but why believe this *particular* set of destructive lies? is the lure of this *particular* kind of white masculinity so strong?

i guess it is.

i'd like to propose an alternative: my dad. if more white guys were like my dad, we wouldn't be in this pickle. don't get me wrong, there would be pickles, but they would be primarily of the green and sour sort.

in the meantime, i'd like to figure out how to encorporate commenting into my weblog. any suggestions for a reliable way of how to do this with blogger?
- posted by clare @ 09:35

 
wow, it's good to finally be EMPLOYED! after five months of looking, i was finally offered a position this morning at the Muskie School of Public Service in the Institute for Health Policy. yay for work, yay for *good* work, yay for benefits, yay for tuition reimbursement, yay for reTIREment, even!

and melanie was offered a job at New England Writers Group just yesterday! yay for a whole house of employed folks! now, if only we could get the cats to pull their weight. mush, you kitties! mush! i wouldn't at all be surprised to arrive home this evening and find our little balls of fuzz, pens in hand, scribbling in the "previous employment" boxes on the applications for seasonal employment at L.L. Bean. aaa! how cute would that be?

in any case, i'm feeling a bit wacky because i'm finally gainfully employed. so, please excuse the weirdness.

in other news...

question: is it "down to only two contenders" in CA because there are no other viable candidates or because the media says so? it's a chicken-or-egg question. something tells me that we'd be in a different political situation if major media outlets didn't get so starstruck with famous celebs when they run for office, get their soundbytes out of their butts, and actually covered candidates' perspectives and qualifications (or lack thereof)... but maybe i'm being a tad too harsh.

speaking of qualifications, did i mention that i got a job?
- posted by clare @ 12:11