Overheard

The great site, Overheard in Minneapolis, has a doozy here, with a customer weighing the benefits of how to apply a 10% discount.

Bye Bye Dara

Twin Citians who have occasionally grabbed the free weekly, the City Pages, are most likely familiar with restaurant critic Dara Moskowitz Grumdahl. Despite giving great reviews of all the foodstuffs the Twin Cities have to offer, she's a colorful and hilarious writer. She can come up with the most outlandish and lengthy metaphors in her task to give you the most accurate sense of the restaurant. To make a point on the cost of wine, she started one article the following way:

Recently I received a sad and plaintive email from a doctor's wife. She wanted to use my bank account to free a Nigerian fortune worth, if you can believe it, hundreds of millions of dollars. And she chose me! As I crowbarred my neighbors' windows in search of additional Social Security numbers, I wondered why she picked me, and then I realized: All the big restaurants I've reviewed lately have been expensive, and more expensive. Of course she would think that the Twin Cities was a land of nothing but millionaires: The price of an average glass of wine seems to have zoomed from $6 to $9, and as far as the dinner entrees, $23 seems to be the new $12.

The City Pages was recently bought by a national media company that owns the Village Voice. Both before and after the change in ownership, the weekly's talented writers have gone to greener pastures. Dara Moskowitz Grumdahl's departure solidifies the City Pages' downfall in my eyes. I'll still take a look at it from time to time, but it's not the newspaper it once was.

Moskowitz Grumdahl will now write for the Minnesota Monthly magazine. Local media critic David Brauer writes about the meaning of this departure in his December story City Pages just lost its sugar mama in the MinnPost.

This week she writes her final piece with the City Pages. It's probably not of interest to first time readers, but fans may appreciate it: Bye-Bye - January 30, 2008

For most of her career at the City Pages, she was simply Dara Moskowitz. Then she got married and added the Grumdahl. Personally, I don't know why someone with the last name Moskowitz would add the equally large portioned Grumdahl, but perhaps I shouldn't be too critical when it comes to choosing names.

This is just wrong

The below map is courtesy of the Weather Channel. It's as of 11:14 AM local time. Nevermind the vicious windchill factor, which in the middle of the day is still minus 27 F. Makes you want to live in Winnipeg, eh?

Remote controlled vasectomies

Via Salon.com's Broadsheet today.

[Insert your male joke here.]

Pot vending machines

Good thing schools are starting to get rid of vending machines. This one would be an interesting addition...

• Vending Machines Dispense Pot in LA - AP, January 30, 2008

It looks pretty slick...

The little things

I'm getting a little tired writing about the politics of the presidential contest, but I can't seem to help myself. Right now, I'm going to go halfway and use a political story to make a non-political point.

The Washington Post today ran a piece about former candidate Bill Richardson's struggle on whether to endorse Clinton or Obama (presumably not Edwards by his omission in the piece). Richardson is under a lot of pressure from all sides to commit. He likes Clinton and feels loyalty towards her. He then tells the reporter one of the reasons he likes Obama, stemming from an experience at a Democratic debate last year:

"I had just been asked a question -- I don't remember which one -- and Obama was sitting right next to me. Then the moderator went across the room, I think to Chris Dodd, so I thought I was home free for a while. I wasn't going to listen to the next question. I was about to say something to Obama when the moderator turned to me and said, 'So, Gov. Richardson, what do you think of that?' But I wasn't paying any attention! I was about to say, 'Could you repeat the question? I wasn't listening.' But I wasn't about to say I wasn't listening. I looked at Obama. I was just horrified. And Obama whispered, 'Katrina. Katrina.' The question was on Katrina! So I said, 'On Katrina, my policy . . .' Obama could have just thrown me under the bus. So I said, 'Obama, that was good of you to do that.'"

I'm not going to claim that this says anything specifically noteworthy about Barack Obama. I'm sure most the other presidential candidates have also said and done nice things in the past, even to political rivals. (Well, maybe not Rudy Giuliani.) What's noteworthy is how a little gesture can make such an impact.

We never truly know how and when the little things will matter. Of all the interactions we have every day, which one is going to carry us forward? Stories like this serve as a reminder to be on one's best behavior in all circumstances and with all people. You never know when a good deed will pay back or when a misdeed will bite you back. Some may call that karma. I think it's just common sense.

Although it might have felt like a big deal at the time, asking the moderator to repeat the question wasn't going to seal the fate of Richardson's campaign. Maybe Obama was thinking ahead when he gave a helping hand to Richardson or maybe it was automatic. In any case, now Richardson is in the position to have an impact with an endorsement and this little gesture may make a difference.

Hillary and Tracy Flick

Okay, this might be a little unfair to Senator Clinton; but I really like the movie Election. It's from Slate.com.

Voice of feminism

Having worked in the advocacy non-profit community, I've seen a wide spectrum in sophistication from advocacy organizations. There are some small, grassroots organizations out there with just a couple staff that are incredibly effective at what they do. Then there are the groups, big and small, which simply take donations and make lots of noise, and often cause trouble for the other groups who are actually making a difference. It can be distressing sometimes.

I suspect that the New York chapter of the National Organization for Women falls into the ineffective category. It's hard to have a favorable impression of them when their president releases this statement:

Women have just experienced the ultimate betrayal. Senator Kennedy’s endorsement of Hillary Clinton’s opponent in the Democratic presidential primary campaign has really hit women hard. Women have forgiven Kennedy, stuck up for him, stood by him, hushed the fact that he was late in his support of Title IX, the ERA, the Family Leave and Medical Act to name a few. Women have buried their anger that his support for the compromises in No Child Left Behind and the Medicare bogus drug benefit brought us the passage of these flawed bills. We have thanked him for his ardent support of many civil rights bills, BUT women are always waiting in the wings.

And now the greatest betrayal! We are repaid with his abandonment! He’s picked the new guy over us. He’s joined the list of progressive white men who can’t or won’t handle the prospect of a woman president who is Hillary Clinton (they will of course say they support a woman president, just not “this” one).

It goes on from there. Thanks to Feministing.com for flagging this

One wonders why many women are hesitant to embrace the term "feminist" even when they seem to hold such viewpoints. Who wants to be in company with people like the author of the above missive?

Today's Quote: More from Bill

I stole this from the Doonesbury website.

"If [Barack Obama] wins this nomination, I'm going to do what I can to help him become president...After all the mean things they said about me, I can't believe I'm saying this."
-- Bill Clinton

Tired of Clinton

No, I'm not talking about Senator Hillary Clinton. I'm talking about the ex-president himself. Maybe it's just me, but is anyone else following the presidential primaries getting fed-up from hearing from Bill Clinton all the time? Every time he opens his mouth to distort Senator Obama's positions or say Hillary will solve the health care mess, my response is, "Who cares what you think?"

Honestly, I want this election to be about the future, not the 1990s. And while I don't think that argument should be what disqualifies Hillary Clinton from consideration, it doesn't make me want to go out and vote for her. I don't want to relive the '90s. The former president's constant presence in the campaign seems to be making the argument that they are simply going for a 3rd Clinton term.

According to the Washington Post, however, it seems many people disagree, Democrats in particular. Chris Cillizza convincingly argues that Bill Clinton overwhelmingly remains the most popular Democrat. This makes sense; what other high profile Democrat has been able to spend any where near as much time in the national spotlight for the last twenty years? Many people, me included, look back wistfully to the Clinton years when we reflect on the last 7 years of the Bush administration.

But was Bill Clinton really the knight in shining armor? Yes, by comparison, he was a world of difference from what we have now. Still, for argument's sake, let's consider the following from Clinton's presidency:

• He did raise taxes slightly on the rich early in his term. Later, he apologized for that and said he regretted it.
• He signed the so-called "welfare reform" act simply to position himself well for the 1996 reelection campaign.
• His environmental policy was a do-nothing approach for most of his 8 years, except for signing a bunch of executive orders in his final days. Many of these were simply and quickly reversed by the Bush administration.
• He opposed the establishment of the International Criminal Court.
  
• He signed the Defense of Marriage Act, putting discrimination into federal law.
• He was wishy washy and allowed millions to be sunk into the development of the National Missile Defense program.
  
• While he didn't invade Iraq, he did oversee nearly a decade of inhuman sanctions on Iraqis that destroyed it's economy and prevented things like medicines, textbooks, and water filters into the country. His administration also did a lot of bombing of Iraq.
• He bombed a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan that, despite arguments at the time, had no link to terrorist activity. The bombing occurred at a suspicious time during the Lewinsky scandal.
• And no, this did not merit an impeachment, but one may consider the guy as a bit slimy. He has an inappropriate relationship with a young employee and then lies to his family and the nation about it.

Yes, he did well too. His administration managed the economy pretty well and balanced the budget. He appointed good judges and signed the Brady Bill. His administration was not marked by continuous incompetence and lies about important things. And yes, I'd much, much, prefer him today to George W. Bush. But the Clinton administration still wasn't "all that."

I've never understood why many Republicans so strongly detest Bill Clinton. I've never really understood why many Democrats so strongly worship Bill Clinton. We shouldn't look at the past through rose-tinted glasses. Bill Clinton was an incredibly gifted and slick politician from the "centrist" Democratic Leadership Council. He frequently "triangulated" and abandoned his own party. He was ineffective in important areas. He has and continues to show a propensity to bend the truth.

I wish he would go back to taking a back seat. I won't hold my breath.

Great story

One of my favorite episodes of This American Life replayed recently. Called, "The Super," it has three acts involving building superintendents. My favorite is the funny, yet creepy, Act I.

You can no longer download the show for free, but you can listen to it live stream for free or pay 95 cents to download it on to your computer or MP3 player.

• This American Life episode #303: The Super

Extreme hybrid cars

It's the "extreme hybrid," plug-in car of the future. Running solely on electricity for 40 miles and having a fuel-cost one-third of gasoline, it sounds like a heck of an improvement. But will it come our way?

The car of the future is here - Jan 22, 2008, Salon.com