The Gurly Life

The problem with being a liar

I have often said that between the person who lies and the person who believes, the one whose life sucks the most is the liar's. Most of us don't look at it this way, we tend to focus on us, how we were betrayed, and how foolish we feel, and how embarrassed we are that we were taken in, and why does this always happen to us and all that sort of dreck. I think we focus on the woe-is-me aspect of being lied to because, after all, that's more or less all we see.

In my opinion, however, it is the liar who gets the raw end of that deal. True, there are situations where the consequences of being lied to can be dire, to wit, the fine people who invested with Bernie Maddoff. Generally, though I do think the one worst off is the one doing the lying.

The liar gets the worst end of the stick because everything they get as a result of their lie is also a lie, and thus has no integrity. As you well know, without integrity, nothing works. Liars can fool themselves into believing that they are doing well, but self-delusion only gets them so far. Inside there somewhere, they live miserable lives. In short, you can't be a liar and be happy.

A startling and albeit extreme example of this is the recent debacle with Dominique Strauss-Kahn and his accuser, Nafissatou Diallo. (You can read the most recent NYTimes article about this here.) Diallo is a big fat liar. BIG. FAT. LIAR. She fabricated being gang raped, for example. What kind of person does that? It appears that she made up all kinds of other stories in all other areas of her life. Maybe she was raped in this instance, but we'll never know because no one believes anything she says now. Yes, I probably could have made my point here in five words: the boy who cried wolf. But then, what would be the point of having a blog? But I digress.

If Diallo was indeed raped, her attacker will not come to justice. If she was not, she just made the biggest asshole of herself ever. Neither of these options is particularly palatable - and this is the problem with being a liar.

When life imitates ... everyone getting high and having a gubernatorial debate

Ok, so I know my comment about this is going to be the LEAST INTERESTING COMMENT ABOUT IT EVER. But finally I cannot resist any longer. I mean, COME ON!! Have you seen any part of the New York gubernatorial debate? If it weren't so funny, it would be depressing. Oh, wait, maybe it would be funny if it weren't so depressing.

Briefly, a recap: "Joining the headline grabbing tea party-favorite Republican candidate [Paladino] and the scion of New York Democratic politics [Andrew Cuomo] were a convicted madam, a Black Panther turned city councilman, a retired mailman [and self-proclaimed karate expert], a current UPS package handler and a lawyer who moonlights as a screenwriter." [From here]

Jimmy McMillan, of the The Rent Is Too Damn High Party. Well, he's kinda right, ok? From here, some of his best quotes:

• On the deficit: "It's like a cancer. It will heal itself."
• On negative campaigning: "As a karate expert, I will not talk about anyone up here."
• On gay marriage: "The Rent Is 2 Damn High Party feels if you want to marry a shoe, I'll marry you."
• On... Jesus, I have no clue what prompted this one: "We plan to bulldoze some of those mountains in Upstate to make New York an independent state. I want my own cable company; I want my own telephone company."
• On the rent: Too damn high.

HAHAHAHA! If you want to marry a shoe, I will marry you? Oh my heavens.

Paladino, as I'm sure we have all heard, has made quite the name for himself for his staunchly family values/anti-gay stance. This coming from the man who has a wife and a mistress. So what he means by family values is polygamy and/or adultery, as long as it's straight poligamy and/or adultery, or as long as it's his poligamy and/or adultery. This guy is less funny, more scary.

Then we have Kristin Davis, a former madam. She said that legislators are "the biggest whores" and she, of all the candidates for governor, is probably the best qualified to deal with them. Well, she's kinda right, too, if you buy into the whore premise. However, I find hypocritical her implication that whores are bad. (A couple more gems can be found here.)

Of course, it's only funny because it's true and over there and because if we don't laugh we will have to stab ourselves in the eye with a sharp object. Can I vote for Andrew Cuomo from California, or is that, like, not allowed?

Russian spies or mass delusion?

Am I the only one who thinks there's a possibility that this ring of Russian spies is a group of escaped mental patients suffering from a mass delusion? I mean, their entire operation appears to have consisted of blending in and just ... reporting on what they noticed, or something to that effect. I have heard in the news (and we know how good they are at reporting) about fake passports, pretend marriages, invisible ink (really? invisible ink? are you shitting me?), buried cash, lame phrases about meeting in California versus the Hamptons, and even having children so as to look like the typical American family.

Aside from what are likely to be unfortunate effects on the "fake" children, the whole thing is so ridiculously bumbling and old-fashioned as to be almost cute. I think my cat would have done a better job setting up a spy ring - which leads me to the only plausible explanation, that we will come to find out that Russia had nothing to do with this, and that these people made the whole thing up to escape the mind-melting drudgery of suburbia and eventually believed their own hype.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Kremlins 2: The New Batch
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Tea Party

Letting go

Letting go of my point of view is the hardest thing in the world. After all, I'm right. Aren't I?

Recently I had a conversation with a friend, someone I love deeply and whose well-being is important to me. This friend, let's call him/her Brian, has a fairly serious physical condition. It is not just serious, it is degenerative. It's a condition that demands that you pay attention to it, eat well, sleep, stay in good shape, and don't work yourself into the ground. If you don't do what is required, your life is in danger.

Brian does not do any of these things. Or rather, he does when his schedule allows. He has taken on more than his share of work responsibilities, family responsibilities, and a giant volunteer gig. Lately, he told me, he has 18-20 hour days, and they will keep being like that until some time in August.

My experience of Brian is that he's an amazing person in almost every respect, but that he puts himself last, and that there is no space for contribution of any kind. I have wondered if his schedule is a way to avoid being responsible for how his relationships go, a way to avoid being fully present for people, a way to manipulate people into submissive roles. After all, nothing can be done in the face of such a schedule - it's on his terms, or nothing. I have wondered whether it was just my contribution that he resisted. I have wanted him to really get the impact on people who love him of not taking care of himself.

Not surprisingly, I have tried in the past to get him to look at some of the choices he has made and really deal with whether or not he has the life he wants. In my opinion, he has settled. Because, as you know, I'm right. Aren't I?

And then I thought, this is not my journey. This is not my lesson to learn. Wherever he is on his path is where he is. My opinion of whether he is doing what is right for himself and for the people in his life is just that: my opinion. I don't know that I'm right. I don't know that he should be doing or being anything other than how he is. Probably not. Perhaps he has lived many more lives than I have, and he knows something I don't. Maybe it's the opposite. Maybe I'm right, and he will die sooner than he should, or maybe I'm wrong, and he won't. Maybe tomorrow he'll wake up and have an epiphany, maybe he'll suffer for the rest of his life, maybe it'll take one year, or ten. Maybe he's not suffering at all.

So I stopped. Because trying to make a difference in someone's life when they don't want it is just annoying. I told him that I trust him, and that whatever choice he makes is the right choice for him. I can't trust him and then turn around and try to convince him to live his life a different way.

Unfortunately, how he is has an impact on me, and that is that I am really upset and worried, and I don't feel either loved or appreciated. That is not his fault, or his responsibility. But that is what's so. All I can do is choose for myself. In order for me not to suffer, I cannot be around him. In order for me to give him the freedom of his experience, I cannot be around him. 

I will miss him.

Resistance is futile

Late last week, I received a text message from Verizon Wireless alerting me to the fact that I was on my way to going over my monthly minutes. In truth, I paid little attention to it - last time I got such a text, I was about 150 minutes below my limit with only a couple of days to go, so I just didn't worry.

WRONG! (A word of warning, do not ignore those texts.)

Yesterday morning, I donned my cool yellah Jawbone bluetooth gizmo, and started making calls on my way to work. First call in, I get rerouted to Verizon Wireless. I was all, whoa! WTF! My first thought, since I'm a law abiding citizen, was that I mentioned C4 in my conversations a little too much. Dang it, I knew this would happen. The reason I've been mentioning C4 is that I filed a case in the Central Justice courthouse and it was assigned to Dept C-4, but those machine things that listen to key words don't know the difference between C-4 the courtroom and C4 the explosive. Incidentally, if Homeland Security got sucked into this post, sorry, dudes.

Natch, it had nothing to do with any key words in my conversations - Verizon saw fit to stop me from making any further calls because I had already incurred EIGHTY-SIX DOLLARS IN OVERAGES. Holy shit! If they hadn't stopped me my cell phone bill would have run me $300. Ouch. Verizon, bless their hearts, decided not to make me pay said $86, which was entirely within their contractual rights to do, but instead helped me find a new plan that would fit my minutes usage better. Instead of an extra $100+ this month, I'll be paying $10 less than I have been.

Of course, this got me thinking about privacy and the modern digital world. Don't get excited, I didn't have any particularly insightful or original thoughts, although it did not escape my notice that I was somewhat grateful for Big Brother Verizon's intervention. However, I must admit I was conflicted about having my call rerouted. On the one hand, I'm grateful that Verizon saved me from myself. On the other, it struck me that even though I am fully aware that there is very little privacy in this here digital age (especially since I blog and Tweet and Facebook and shop online and can't remember the last time I used my land line at home), I still have an expectation of privacy. My expectation of privacy is that what I write online is not private, but that my phone conversations and text messages are private, and they are intended to be so, and I don't think about it much beyond that.

The question I ask myself is this: is Big Brother already here, with our consent and at our invitation? Or is this simply the modern version of community? Is it an invasion of privacy, or at least a little creepy, that Verizon would hijack my call to have a conversation with me about not wasting my money, or is Verizon part of my community now, a community that is exponentially larger than it was 10 years ago, and that includes all kinds of people who I have never met and who I will never meet, but who contribute to my life in different ways? And does the fact that Verizon is ultimately in it for the money make any difference to the answer to the question? After all, everyone in my life has their own agenda that they pursue, as do I, and our agendas may or may not align, but that does not mean that we are not part of a community and that we do not contribute something to each other.

This query extends to the new privacy settings on Facebook. I read up on the changes, and they do not appear particularly threatening to me. (Incidentally, here is a concise and clear article about what the changes consist of, and how to adjust your settings, courtesy of Nicholas de Wolff and Fast Company.) I have adjusted my privacy settings, and am not particularly concerned about my FB friends knowing what pages I like on the internet, or for that matter about The Internet knowing what pages I like. My surfing and online shopping preferences are no secret to anyone. Besides, Facebook is free. There are trade-offs.

Which brings me to another point: are they really trade-offs? Facebook is a social networking site, emphah-sis on social. Its entire premise, its raison d'etre if you will, is for its members to be all up in each other's business. I mean, that's the point, right? And for folks who do not want to be public, they can simply avoid updates or really much activity at all and then they can choose to contact their friends offline or by email or whatever. The point is, is it fair or even reasonable to be on a huge social networking site, be active on it daily, and then expect to have privacy?

I do see that there is a distinction between privacy as to your friends, and privacy as to commercial establishments that want your business. However, I also think that we are smart enough to be able to treat our friends and businesses differently.

So I guess my point is this: that whether I feel that my privacy is invaded or that my community has expanded to fit modern life is largely a matter of perception. I for one lean towards believing that my community has expanded. But then, I don't have much of a sense of privacy, so maybe I'm not the best person to ask.

Umph.

Yesterday I took in my car for its 40,000 mile service. I take good care of my cars. I figure, pay a little bit now, don't have to pay massive amounts of money to replace the engine when it burns out because I haven't replaced the oil, or drive into a tree because one of the wheels falls off. Granted, likelihood of either of those happening is not very high, but you get the idea.

I got a call from the dealership to tell me that everything looks good, but that there is some carbon build-up in the fuel injector system* and I should get it flushed. You know, that just sounds like baloney. Maybe I'm wrong, but I kept asking what the disadvantage would be of having carbon build-up, and I did not get a satisfactory answer. The answer was along the lines of "You don't want carbon to get built up." Upon asking why not, what would happen, the answer was that the carbon would build up more. Finally I got some vague answer about fuel efficiency, but I keep an eye on my fuel consumption and I've been averaging 54mpg's for a while. I am not worried about fuel efficiency just yet. When I drop below 50mpg, then I'll get the fuel injector flushy thingy.

So I said thanks, but no thanks. The helpful service guy said he would make a note of the carbon buildup on my invoice. He did not. Can't be that important if he forgot about it the second he told me about it, right? RIGHT?

*Don't ask me what a fuel injector system is, or what it does, because all I can tell you is that it injects fuel, and that sounds like it could be useful.

LAFD did the right thing

This little controversy has been brewing for a few days. I say little because the negative comments are far outweighed by the positive. However, I am in such vehement disagreement with the negative comments that I feel compelled to add my two cents.

A few days ago, the LAFD rescued a German shepard dog trapped in the strongly flowing LA River. It was a good rescue, though the firefighter who grabbed the dog got a few bites, and as the LAFD pointed out, it was only a matter of time until some good Samaritan would have jumped in the water to help and got themselves drowned. LAFD saves animals all the time, from fires, floods, from being trapped, and so on. This is part of what they do, who they are. In this case, they were criticized by some for the waste of resources. To be honest, the thought that saving an animal is considered by anyone to be a waste of resources makes me cry. I am an animal lover, I am owned by cats, and they are part of the family.

So I add my voice of thanks to firefighter Joe St. Georges, who pulled the dog out of the water, and to the other members of the LAFD who assisted. I thank you for this rescue, as for all the great and compassionate work that you do.

Here's a link to a newspaper article about this, and the link to the Facebook fan page to thank firefighter St. Georges. You can also watch a video of the heroic rescue and leave your message of support at the LAFD blog, here (if you're coming from my blog, I request you leave a message of support; if you disagree with me on this one, then please find your way to the link on your own).

Some god thoughts

Driving home today I was listening to Speaking of Faith on NPR. The topic was the novelist as god, and here's how they describe today's program: "Novelist Mary Doria Russell shares what she discerned about God and about dilemmas of evil, doubt, and free will."

By the way, if you've never listened to Speaking of Faith, I cannot recommend it more. It is fascinating and thought-provoking. And I encourage you to listen to this particular episode, it is much more interesting than this post.

Russell said something that I thought was both incredibly poetic and mind-bending: she was talking about cosmology, and the theory that the universe might not have simply began at the big bang, but might instead be in a constant state of expansion and then contraction. An incredibly long process, to be sure, but how she relates it to god is that the universe is god's breath. When the universe is expanding, god is breathing out. When the universe is contracting, god is breathing in.

Assuming for a second that this expand/contract theory is accurate, the current universe is 13 billion years old and still expanding. So even if it stopped expanding right now (whiplash!), that is one LOOOOONG breath. Which I believe is pretty good indication that god does yoga. No, just kidding.

So Russell's concept of god is that it is all-encompassing. I mean, imagine a supreme being (if you can even call it that) who takes 13 billion years to breathe out. Actually, I don't think we can fully imagine such a thing. I certainly have a tough time wrapping my mind around it.

That, I find, is a beautiful concept, but it also made me laugh about religion in general. For my religious friends, sorry, please don't take offense, ok? But I thought, my god (hah!) how ironic would it be if we could prove the existence of god and then discovered that god has no awareness of or interest in us. No doubt we would convince ourselves that this is not the true god, but that's another conversation.

Of course, it has always been my opinion that to think that we are made in the image of god and that therefore we hold this high place is the height of arrogance and hubris. I mean, seriously, how self-centered can we be?  I am mystified by all the religions, and the subsets of the religions, all of which are CONVINCED they know the word of god. As Russell said, just because we want so much to matter, does not lead to the logical conclusion that there is anything out there.

This leads to another thought: if we are made in the image of god, then why would we think that we alone are made in its image? Why isn't everything in the universe created in its image, and why would we be any more important than rocks and gerbils? Just because we can think? Mmh. I'm not convinced.

And of course, like religions, this is just an opinion, and I could be wrong.

Oh - and this:

"Defenders of Marriage" by Roy Zimmerman

Found by the brilliant and inspiring Urban Koda.

No escape

Today both Farrah Fawcett and Michael Jackson passed away. She from cancer, he from a heart attack. All the money and fame in the world, all the beauty, the talent, the popularity - none of it made a difference. In the end, we are all human.