The oil spill

This makes me so sad.

On a "warmer" note... 72 degrees!

It's a Minnesota miracle! Or so they tell us. This was the first March on record without snow here in the now un-frozen tundra. And with the early thaw came all sorts of things I didn't expect, including a return of many residents of our herb garden. We've taken advantage of the gorgeous weather to get started on our cleaning, weeding and planting. We're trying some new things this year and learning as we go.

The golden raspberry bush, coming back to life, bringing forth lots of little babies.

Basil & cilantro in pots, because although it's been warm and although I've only lived in Minnesota a year and a half, I'm no dummy. I can bring them in if we get a cold spell. Also in the pots are arugula and swiss card seeds. In the coconut grass planter, I've transplanted some chocolate mint -- hoping it catches and does well in the hanging planter. Chocolate mint mojitos anyone?

The herb garden is reborn! The oregano, chives, sage & thyme are all doing well. And there's still hope for a curly parsley plant. To the left I've planted some lettuce beds -- Forrellenschluss and two musclun mixes.
Here's our new cherry tree. The cherries will be tart, not sweet, so with any luck, there will be lots of cherry pies, crisps, tarts and jams in the Tomback house this July. We're hoping to add a couple of plum trees in the next few weeks.

And here's the zucchini that came as a total surprise. This is exactly where it was last year, so apparently a seed from a hunk of vegetable that got left in the ground all winter decided to make a come back. Yay!

This little hard-to-see baby is one of our two new blueberry bushes. They have both been ravaged by some little fucker -- probably a rabbit. They're still alive, so I'm hoping they can rally and make it through. I've watered them like crazy and covered them with netting to prevent any further mutilation. I've also sprinkled the area liberally with fox urine pellets. Fingers crossed!

And these are my gorgeous seedlings chillin' in under the flourescent light in the workroom. I actually have two trays, and they are full of 4 varieties of tomatoes, 5 varieties of peppers, 2 kinds of eggplant and okra. Now I know what all of you are thinking -- especially the NYC crowd: Mary, are you crazy trying to grow Okra in Zone 4? Well, yes, this is perhaps a fruitless endeavor (pun completely intended). But this variety is more cold-hardy than others, and you only live once, right? So why not just throw caution to the wind and try to grow okra! This is the first year starting my own seeds, and so far, so good. With any luck at this point, I'll even have some extra plants to pass along for my neighbors' gardens.

And finally, Noah, Luke & our neighbor Symone making a frickin' disaster at the sand/water table. Totally worth the mess.

No, no, no!!

I came across this today on Facebook. Right now, I really should be in my garage, pricing things and setting up for my garage sale tomorrow. But I can't. I'm going to write this instead.

A large part of the reason I practice my faith these days at an Episcopal congregation is because I don't agree with the Vatican on much of anything. I want to be a devout Catholic -- really, I do. But I love receiving communion during Mass from a female priest. God Bless You, Rev. Nancy! I love that everyone at Mass is invited to partake in communion. I love that I am not banished to confession if I miss services on any given week. I love that my priest would not send me marching off to confession upon learning that (back in our fertile days), my husband and I were pretty attached to our birth control. I love that I am great friends with the WIFE of our priest, i.e., I love that our priest gets to have a WIFE. I love that the diocese of Minnesota nominated a lesbian priest to be its new bishop, because Episcopalians, as a denomination, have nothing against homosexuals. And I love that I can go to services and experience the same rituals and traditions that I treasure about having grown up Catholic.

And I have tried to refrain from too much judgment against the MODERN Catholic church in the wake of the most recent news of priest sex scandals. Initially, I did not blame the church for the fact that some of its priests molested young children. I ABSOLUTELY point my finger directly and solely at the church for those times when priests molested children AGAIN -- those times when the accused were quietly shuffled to a new congregation. But as to Pope Benedict and the current Vatican, I didn't necessarily hold too large a grudge because much of what was coming to light now were atrocities that occurred in the past. And I frankly wasn't paying too much attention to Cardinal Ratzinger's role in any of the previous cover-ups, simply because I didn't care enough.

But now I care. Because when the Pope's #2 says publicly that "he's been told" there is "a relationship between homosexuality and pedophilia," I want to scream. Sure there is, in that some pedophiles are homosexuals. And other pedophiles are heterosexuals. But that's not what he was insinuating, and the world knows it.

This comment was apparently made amidst the debate about the forced celibacy of priests, the idea being, that if priests were allowed to be married, perhaps they wouldn't have such sexual hang-ups and issues that may play a part in the pathology leading them to pedophilia. Sure -- I buy that.

But I think the conversation needs to go one step further. Specifically, the Catholic church (and every other religion that condemns homosexuals) needs to recognize that homosexuality is not a sickness. It's not a crime. It's not a sin. It's not something to be scared of, shunned and hidden. Let's consider all of the sick bastards during the 50s, 60s, 70s, who were molesting young boys: first of all, I don't believe all of them were homosexuals. Priests' access to kids back in the day was most often with boys, because only boys were allowed to be altar servers. So I'm sure some of them were actually fucked up heterosexuals who were choosing their victims based on access and availability, more than sexual orientation. But with respect to those who would have considered themselves homosexuals, I believe very strongly that many of them entered the priesthood as an escape. It was not okay for them to be gay -- not in their families, their communities, or their churches. They felt they had no choice but to repress this identity. They were taught homosexuality was a curse, a disgusting, sinful curse that would land them straight in hell. So their call to the priesthood, as genuine as it may have been, was a perfectly acceptable escape. Priests weren't sexual beings, after all, so it didn't matter if they felt sexual feelings for men, rather than women, because they couldn't act on them anyway. BUT, they nevertheless had to hide this part of their identities in every aspect of their lives. Moreover, they had to preach to their congregants the evils of homosexuality. How on earth could this not have fucked them up even more?

Is all of this an excuse for pedophilia in the church? Absolutely not. But isn't it reasonable to consider it a factor in the discussion of the guilty priests? It speaks nothing to the other criminal behavior at work -- the persistent cover-up by the church -- but if we're going to talk about why this can happen in the church at all, I think this topic is relevant.

Thank you, New York!

So, someone or something during our travels last week gave me a cold. Yuck. I'm just now feeling semi-normal again. So forgive my belated note/blog of thanks -- we had such a wonderful time! And we absolutely LOVED seeing each and every one of you. It was the perfect way to spend Sweetie's birthday! Some pictures -- the second one is Noah's butt in front of the T-rex at the museum. He insisted on that one. The last one of is Noah riding his bike without training wheels for the first time.

#8 and #9

8. The Stone Diaries by Carol Shields. Won the Pulitzer Prize in 1993. I picked it up at our church's book sale last summer for $1 -- can't say that I would have gravitated toward it in a book store or sought it out. But it was a really beautiful novel -- the story of a woman from her birth through her death, told from the interchangeable perspective of the people in her life, and occasionally from her own perspective. Haven't decided whether I'll put it back in the donation box for next year or if I'll keep it as part of our "library."

9. A Year in Provence by Peter Mayle. Love Provence. Love the French. Have an unshakable urge to go bask in the sun outside of a cafe eating, drinking, smelling the lavender and gazing out at the vineyards.

A point of clarification

I have given this some more thought since writing the last post, and I can actually think of many republicans I know and love who are not, in any way, douchebags -- my father, being a prime example. And I wholeheartedly apologize to those people I love whom I have offended by my stream-of-consciousness ranting.

I'm still bewildered by the positions the PARTY takes, however. Some of them truly seem contradictory to me, particularly when espoused by the hard-core Christian right. And I'm still disgusted by the tactics employed by some of its more vocal and extremist leadership. For example, twittering that it's time to "reload," mocking, ridiculing and belittling a sick man at a rally, suggesting Obama is a Muslim (inherently implying there's a problem with being a Muslim), etc. The debates we are having in this country are not civilized. They are petty and immature and shameful.

One of the most pathetic aspects of these behaviors is the inability to see that the pot is calling the kettle black. And for that, I will now call out some of the democrat douchebags that have sickened me as of late. Mr. Stupak and Mr. Nelson are prime examples -- cutting deals and making stinks that undermine any genuine attempts at good faith negotiations. And don't even get me started of John Edwards. I feel so duped that I bought into his "poor, Southern boy made good" act. How these charming southern-boy, philandering jackasses can look right into a camera and bold-faced LIE about fathering a child or getting blow job from an intern is beyond me. Is it idiocy, or arrogance, or naivete that allows them to believe they will get away with the lies?

So it's settled -- there are republican douchebags and democrat douchebags. But I would love to engage in a "mature" policy discussion (one in which I will refrain from labeling anyone a douchebag or a jackass) SOMEDAY. (But not anytime soon. And not over pizza. And not in LaPorte. ;-) Love you, Mrs. Howard!!)

Partisan Politics

I'm confused about something, and I have been for a while. I started drafting this post in my head as I was driving around, listening to a caller chime-in on the health care debate on NPR. I'd love for any of the loyal NINE readers to explain the following to me.

I know a lot of Christian fundamentalists, or people who would otherwise label themselves as very religious (choice of word important here -- I do not mean "spiritual"), who are die-hard Republicans. They want the government to stay out of their lives. (An example, I heard today that Texas Governor Rick Perry is planning a lawsuit to challenge the constitutionality of the newly-enacted health care reform bill, urging Texans -- including the 6 million without insurance -- "to take responsibility for their own health.") Yet another tenet of the party platform is "American values," which loosely translated seems to mean no assistance for illegal immigrants, no abortions and no gay marriage, or even according to some people, no equality for same-sex couples.

The latter strikes me as among the most significant possible infringements by government in one's life -- the government in your bedroom and in your uterus. (I, for one, would much rather have the government in my health insurance company.) Yet most conservatives welcome that infringement and fight for it, assumingly because they place themselves on such high moral ground that this invasion of privacy wouldn't affect them, the heterosexual virgins-until-marriage that we know all them to be. But surely some of these devout church-goers are themselves without health insurance? Perhaps, dare I say, some of them may be smokers, or diabetics, or otherwise at risk for a chronic health condition that could render them uninsurable or financially crippled due to out-of-pocket healthcare costs under our current system? Universal health care in general is virulently opposed by conservatives, notwithstanding the fact that it could help them, their neighbors, their families, their friends and their communities, because they don't want government in their lives. Apparently, they'd rather have the millions of Americans without insurance die broke from a disease that wasn't properly treated, than have some government-run health care. Because some version of the current bill would have theoretically allowed healthcare funds be used to subsidize abortions, even those abortions that are medically necessary, the whole bill is rendered evil and catastrophic. I don't get it.

Bravo to the group of Catholic nuns who urged Congress to pass the healthcare reform bill, despite official opposition by the U.S. Council of Catholic Bishops. These brave women wrote that the bill "will uphold longstanding conscience protections and it will make historic new investments – $250 million – in support of pregnant women. . . . This is the REAL pro-life stance, and we as Catholics are all for it.” But one nun in particular went even farther, writing that national health care must include “Medicaid funding for a woman on Medicaid … who chooses this legal medical procedure.” God bless her and all those people that prayerfully dissent from what their religious leaders tell them and choose to recognize that this issue is not so one-sided.

Speaking more broadly, I remember what someone told me once about democrats and republicans. I was in college at the time, interning for the summer with U.S. Congressman Charles Taylor in NC, a Republican. He was a tree farmer, and a logger, and cast numerous votes that destroyed much of the western NC wilderness. These things didn't bother me at the time -- I knew I wanted to go to law school, he was the congressman from my home district, and I wanted the experience for my applications.

The other experience I was getting that summer was as a public relations intern for the United Way. When I was shoved into the dark, dank, dusty basement of the congressman's fundraising office to "clean and organize" YEARS worth of press clippings and notes from constituents, I came across several letters to the editors of area newspapers from my supervisor at the United Way, railing on the congressman. I talked to her about it at some point, and she told me that she thought democrats tended to be nicer people than republicans, because their platform is based on helping people, rather than forcing everyone to make it on their own.

At the time, I thought this was complete crap. I'm not sure I do anymore. I'm confused. Because all of the issue that are important to me -- conserving resources and being kind to the earth, promoting diversity, ensuring a healthy food supply, making sure ALL children have access to the SAME quality of food, education, and health care, giving those people who got dealt a crappy hand in life some support, treating all people with dignity, respect and fairness -- are NOT supported by the republicans. That are strongly, loudly and shamelessly opposed by most republicans. To me, these beliefs epitomize a pro-life ideology; specifically, I think these things are exactly what Jesus -- the religious leader so many conservatives claim to follow -- preached. Jesus said that God is the judge, not man. He said help your neighbor out. He begged us to love the earth the God created for us (in 6 days of course, a mere several thousand years ago.) He brought compassion to those people the community ostracized and condemned. He pleaded with people to not be douchebags to each other. (My words, not his.)

So I'm going to need some help here. I have found myself more and more lately leaning toward the dangerous predisposition that republicans = douchebags. I know this can't possibly be true. So I need someone to explain to me how and why I'm wrong. Please.

UPDATE: Bob Herbert is preaching to the choir! Preach on!!