the wrong side of the bed

this is kind of gross - consider yourself warned. every so often i like to use needles to scrape skin particles and what not from the crevices of my watch. i have enjoyed doing this ever since i was a kid. in pursuit of this i managed to take apart my watch so completely that i cannot get it back together. i'm rather saddened by this because i am a bit dependent on my watch. it isn't that i need to know what time it is because i have a very tight schedule or something, but rather i am accustomed to the weight on my wrist. still, cleaning the watch felt to me to be the most worthwhile activity of my day. either this speaks poorly of the rest of what i have spent my time doing, or the joy i derive from cleaning the accordian band of my watch with an unfolded safety pin is more engrossing than it has any right to be. i'd say the new cohort of grad students does not hold a candle to my clean but broken watch.

probably nothing, unless you are sean, in which case you recommended an awesomely awesome movie to me. thanks! autumn and i were laughing so hard that we were snorting as we watched Shaolin Soccer. i will never look at raw eggs the same way.

p.s. drek, i really think you should watch this.

mustafa is amazed by the blogging phenomena. he's in the TA office right now. it is funny because i have been feeling so over blogging lately. readers, should i keep on going? seriously. i'm gonna make a poll.

why, why, why do people set off fireworks every night during the summer? is it really that much fun? i mean, they are basically just setting off the kind that make noise. they don't even look cool. just noise. and, because i lived in new haven for a while, i always initially think that i am hearing gun shots. i suppose that i should be relieved and yet i am irritated. but, i am always irritated.

have i mentioned that i am covered in a film because of the humidity? yucksville.

thanks to jeremy for helping me fix my template. everything inexplicably jumped to the left.

while walking up the hill to school today, a boy ran past me who looked startlingly like my high school debate partner who, strangely enough, went on to date chelsea clinton at stanford. yes, if you recall, he was the swimmer who was studying theology. in high school, we weren't debate partners for long. he was much better than i was and eventually teamed up with my friend kim. i did not have the killer instinct that was needed for CX debate or the oratorical skills needed for Lincoln-Douglas. matt had blood thirst to spare. in fact, after we lost our first two debates (largely because of me), matt told me, "if we lose the next debate, i am going to fucking kill you!" such a nice young man! i rather hated him. when he was dating chelsea, i was tempted to contact the secret service and let them know about the threat on my life.

thinking about this reminded me of my mother's attempts to encourage me between the rough years of 5 and 18. i was not very popular, as you might expect given that i was (am) fat with bad skin and quite odd. my mother used to tell me that all of the popular kids would have used up their allotment of hapiness and success as teens and that they would be washed-up and sad as adults. afterall, she said, where do you go once you are no longer head cheerleader? only down. her theory hasn't played out very well over the years. i, for example, i have never dated chelsea clinton. i am still the lonely fat kid that i always was. take that, mom!

when i got to school today, i found a terrifying thing in my mailbox from my mother. she sent me a postcard that had obviously been sent to her first. it is from the gigantic methodist church near are home. the head dude of the church was our neighbor for a very long time. we never particularly liked them, nor did they like us. their children used to throw things at our house. the youngest son was a particular terror and would taunt me on the bus. anyway, the postcard mom sent advertises "prayer for dummies" which is a "valuable reference for people new to prayer and seasoned veterans as well." i believe that i will be googling this family very soon. how did the minister's children fair? they were more popular than me (but who wasn't). by my mom's calculations, they should be in jail by now. here's hoping.

i came home tonight and, for the first time in ages, actually felt like posting.* by some cruel twist of fate, my phone line was inexplicably dead. twenty minutes later, it is working again. hmm... i just hope i haven't lost my momentum. but, and i may just be saying this because i am a pessimist, i probably have. expect this to be short and dull. i promise not to let you down.

long time readers of my blog (and one new reader who went back and read the entire thing) might remember that i did not go to prom but rather drove to austin with a friend. the night of prom we watched Four Weddings and a Funeral. tonight i watched it again after a very long (ten year) period of time. i have to say that i still enjoy the film** (and i still think that andie macdowell was a huge casting mistake). i think what i like best is the funeral scene. matthew's recitation of the w.h. auden poem is very moving. during the credits, they show each character involved with someone. matthew has seemingly found some new, young love after gareth's death. this upsets me. i guess as a teenager, i didn't really notice that he had moved on. i think i really wanted their love to be something that couldn't be gotten over. matthew should not have been able to have another relationship. he should have been ruined.

anyway, this reminds that i saw a funeral procession driving from service to cemetery yesterday. the lead car had a sign and some flashing lights and was followed by another car, the hearse, and a string of other cars with little flags. i think that being the lead car in a funeral procession must be a very stressful job. i mean, having one person follow behind me is rough, but being responsible for 10 cars making it through a single light seems like it would require timing and awareness that i just don't have.

a stupid thing to worry about when all is said and done.

* i'm sorry to report that i still don't feel like reading anyone's blog. i will again, just not now.

** i'm not saying that this is the best movie ever, just that i enjoy watching it. scarlett is so cute!

i know, i know. it has been so long since my last post, which itself was unsatisfactory at best. my life has just been so... uninteresting? i moved. i packed. i moved. i unpacked. not much to say. i sweat. i shower. i break down boxes. i wonder where things are. i strip the skin off my fingers with toxic cleaners. i sleep. i check my email. i have no stories to tell. nothing to say at all. certain friends have made me laugh. certain friends have made my feel soul-weary. my family provides emotional stability, and i am grateful. i sleep. i shower. i eat. i wonder what you are doing, but i don't ask. i can't find my phone. the line isn't hooked up yet, then it is. my eyes hurt like i have spent the day at the pool. i need to trim my finger nails.

eh. i've been busy. i had to move and shit. peeps is giving me lots of 'tude about my lack of posts. what can i say? sometimes i have to focus on the real world. plus, i have been working on a secret (shhh!) project that i will tell you about later. anyway, for those of you who need more dorotha in your lives, and who doesn't (although i must say that i could use a little less), why don't you check out careyoke's blog for a little dirt on me. don't forget to vote. it's like practicing for the upcoming elections. yeah.

i am not a hottie. i'm not trying to fish for compliments or even reassurances, that isn't what this post is about. it is about the insane levels of annoyance and hatred* that i feel when men scream shit out of car windows at me. who are you to yell at me? this morning on my walk with carey and lisa, some guy yelled out of his van window something to the effect of, "if this were a race, you ladies would be winning it!" now, lisa and carey maybe be able to work it, but i am fat and pigeon-toed. my only physical charm in this world is that i dress in such a way as to look like a comic book character - think of a chubbier enid coleslaw. on my early morning walks i just look sweaty and gross. no offense to lisa and carey, but we all look sort of sweaty and gross. it isn't really about being attractive, i guess, which makes it all the more irritating. why do some men think they can just yell shit at me? well, i guess there is some base level yelling that all women get, and then more is heaped on top for the big-breasted among us. i know more attractive women get yelled at more than i do. i can't imagine what it is like to be some skinny undergrad walking down the street with all of the frat houses. how are more of my women students not filled with the same rage and righteous indignation that i am?

* okay, once i was amused rather than irritated by something a man said to me on the street. i was walking in NYC and a homeless man said quite cheerfully to me, "happy presidents' day! can i smell your pussy?" it was, in fact, presidents' day, but if it is not, do you suppose he says, "happy tuesday" or something like that instead? i couldn't help but laugh.

okay, i am moving in a couple of days and things are about to get SERIOUS around the harried hovel. i don't have the time or engergy to post something just now, so check out this link, while it lasts, to an interview with my friend sean and his pals. they make comics that you would like. or maybe not.

is it wrong to laugh at a friend if she, after unsuccessfully shooting spitballs that are to big for the straw, inhales one that is too small? people always tell me that i am mean, and i am trying to figure out where the cruelty line exactly lies.

three hours i have been awake. three hours of no one to talk to but myself. i hate sundays. i am always so lonely and volatile. as anyone who has been around me for three hours straight knows, i go through rapid mood changes. happy, melancholy, tickled pink, full of rage... and there is no one to direct this at except myself. by one i will be full of desperation. by two i will invent some task that requires driving across town. by three i will be sulking because the only person i have spoken to is the cashier at target. by four i will be taking a nap. maybe i won't wake up until monday.

hmm... a week before i am in my new apartment. i am very excited. i am so tired of this little cube i live in. the new place is not as institutional feeling. there are older plumbing fixtures that are more likely to cause problems, but there is so much more character! no air conditioning, but wooden floors! i live in a box. a terrible box. please, give me a bathroom with an awkward shape. give me a balcony that seems like it might fall to pieces. get me out of here.

tonight i accidently helped a near stranger move. i think this is the way to go. despite the fact that she was having a miserable time after a 12 hour day of fighting with her mother, i was completely unaffected! i didn't know any of them well enough to care who was wrong or right. i am moving next weekend. my parents offered a few times to help out with the move, and i said no each time. nothing is worse than having your parents help with a move. i swear, it brings out the worst parts of my personality when i am understress AND in front of mom and dad. i think i have come up with a brilliant solution to this. i need help with my move, but would prefer the help of strangers. other people need help with their moves, too. i will set up some sort of friends and family service in which you people could donate their time to a move on behalf of someone, but then help an entirely different person move! genius, no?

yesterday i was thinking about those girls in my high school with giant smiles. the cheerleaders, dance team, student council, and activities girls all smiled with all of their teeth showing. molars and all. i hated smiling when i was young, and when i laughed i would cover my mouth with my hand. it had nothing to do with my teeth, and everything to do with the big, round cheeks i inherited from my mother's side of the family. when i smiled, my eyes would become tiny slits. in school pictures, i always looked sort of creepy. my mouth would be closed, pulled tightly to the sides in an effort to show hapiness, and my eyes would be as wide as i could make them. i would practice this wide-eyed grimace in the mirror after school when i had the house to myself. sometimes i would try to smile like those big-mouthed girls, but i seemed to have come equipped with fewer teeth. too bad popularity was contingent on this, at least for girls. boys didn't have to smile as much.

but, i wouldn't have wanted to be a boy. forget the physical reasons that being a boy would suck, the emotional consequences of being as unpopular as i was would have been seriously detrimental. lets just say that there were a few boys wearing trench coats in my high school. one such boy, david, was moved into my english class part way through my freshman year. i didn't know david at all, but some of the other kids had been in classes with him before and knew that he was... gasp... WEIRD! he carried a tackle box with him to school which contained, among other things, razor blades. this would not fly in this day and age, but in 1990, we were so much more innocent. our teacher told us that david was going to be joining our class. the other students had a discussion and decided that, as the least popular member of the class, i should be an emissary to david and tell him that we didn't want him being too weird in our class. they told me that i should be most able to relate to him and that i would also be less threatening to him since i was such a big loser myself. i was not happy with this, but i didn't know what to do. my ninth grade english class marked the first time that i willingly spoke out loud to my classmates. i really enjoyed the teacher and the friendly banter he encouraged between students. i didn't want to jeopardize that. so on the day that david entered our class, i sat next to him (we didn't have assigned seats). i couldn't tell what the others saw wrong with him, he was friendly enough. that day, no one sat near us. they wanted to be far away from what might be the fall out of my message, but there was no crazy reaction on david's part because there was no way i was going to do what the class had nominated me to do. instead, i just talked to him during class. he was pretty funny. afterwards, i was asked how it went and i said fine.

my dad's mom, grandmother harried, sent me an email today. she emails some stupid joke to us about once every five weeks. my maternal grandmother is very liberal and also very huggable and sweet. grandmother harried is none of these things. as a child, i never wanted to touch her and imagined that is how people must also have felt about nancy reagan. can you imagine being a child and hugging nancy reagan? she was so judgmental and... bony. i don't recall ever sitting on her lap or touching her at any point other than greetings and goodbyes.

today she forwarded to my family (democrats) and my dad's siblings (republicans) an email supposedly from a father to his children. when i found her email in my inbox today, i read it all the way through. she must know that my family is liberal, so why send this to us? it is terrible, xenophobic, and misinformed. i thought there had to be a joke if i just got to the end. when i finished reading it, i thought to myself, "does she even know me? has she ever met me?" i usually reserve those questions for my mom when she sends me a particularly odd care package (really mom, a tapestry jacket?), but in this case the question seemed really appropriate. but, the thing is, i started wondering if my grandmother really knows my political opinions. i assume that she does, but what if i am wrong? my dad's side of the family has studiously avoided discussing since before i was born (i'd have to guess that it dates back to the vietnam war). more than just my political opinions, i wonder if my grandmother knows me very much at all. i don't even know if she knows what i study in grad school. we aren't allowed to talk very much when we see our grandparents. my grandparents follow that "seen but not heard" philosophy when it comes to children. now that we are older, there isn't so much a rule about it, just a tradition of oppressive silence. frequently my family sits around just looking at each other. we aren't allowed to have music or television. sometimes as many as four of us will be playing separate games of solitaire on the living room floor. in such an environment, what could you learn about another person?

anyway, here is the email that my grandmother sent. i don't know whether to tell you to read it or not.

Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 17:47:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Elizabeth Harried
Subject: Fwd: Fw: Long, but worth it!
To: Dorotha Harried

We, too, have always supported EVERY President after election as it is OUR country and we want the best.

This letter takes a little bit of time to read. It is, however, one of the most succinct pieces I have ever read about the current war on terrorism.

Please take time to read it.



The following was written by a retired attorney to his four sons.

THE WORLD SITUATION - A LETTER TO MY SONS - May 19, 2004

Dear Tom, Kevin, Kirby and Ted:

As your father, I believe I owe it to you to share some thoughts on the present world situation. We have over the years discussed a lot of important things, like going to college, jobs and so forth. But this really takes precedence over any of those discussions. I hope this might give you a longer term perspective that fewer and fewer of my generation are left to speak to. To be sure you understand that this is not politically flavored, I will tell you that since Franklin D. Roosevelt, who led us through pre and W.W.II (1933 - 1945) up to and including our present President, I have without exception, supported our presidents on all matters of international conflict. This would include just naming a few in addition to President Roosevelt - W.W.II: President Truman - Korean War 1950; President Kennedy - Bay of Pigs (1961); President Kennedy - Vietnam (1961); [1] eight presidents (5 Republican & 4 Democrat) during the cold war (1945 - 1991) President Clinton's strikes on Bosnia (1995) and on Iraq (1998).[2] So be sure you read this as completely nonpolitical or otherwise you will miss the point.

Our country is now facing the most serious threat to its existence, as we know it, that we have faced in your lifetime and mine (which includes W.W.II). The deadly seriousness is greatly compounded by the fact that there are very few of us who think we can possibly lose this war and even fewer who realize what losing really means. First, let's examine a few basics:

1. When did the threat to us start?
Many will say September 11, 2001. The answer as far as the United States is concerned is 1979, 22 years prior to September 2001, with the following attacks on us: Iran Embassy Hostages, 1979; Beirut, Lebanon Embassy 1983; Beirut, Lebanon Marine Barracks 1983; Lockerbie, Scotland Pan-Am flight to New York 1988; First New York World Trade Center attack 1993; Dhahran, Saudi Arabia Khobar Towers Military complex 1996; Nairobi, Kenya US Embassy 1998;Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania US Embassy 1998; Aden, Yemen USS Cole 2000; New York World Trade Center 2001; Pentagon 2001. (Note that during the period from 1981 to 2001 there were 7,581 terrorist attacks worldwide).[3]

2. Why were we attacked?
Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms. The attacks happened during the administrations of Presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2. We cannot fault either the Republicans or Democrats as there were no provocation's by any of the presidents or their immediate predecessors, Presidents Ford or Carter.

4. Who were the attackers?
In each case, the attacks on the US were carried out by Muslims.

5. What is the Muslim population of the World? 25%

6. Isn't the Muslim Religion peaceful?

Hopefully, but that is really not material. There is no doubt that the predominately Christian population of Germany was peaceful, but under the dictatorial leadership of Hitler (who was also Christian) that made no difference. You either went along with the administration or you were eliminated. There were 5 to 6 million Christians killed by the Nazis for political reasons (including 7,000 Polish priests).[4](http://www.nazis.testimony.co.uk/7-a.htm). Thus, almost the same numbers of Christians were killed by the Nazis, as the 6 million holocaust Jews who were killed by them, and we seldom heard of anything other than the Jewish atrocities. Although Hitler kept the world focused on the Jews, he had no hesitancy about killing anyone who got in his way of exterminating the Jews or of taking over the world - German, Christian or any others. Same with the Muslim terrorists. They focus the world on the US, but kill all in the way -
their own people or the Spanish, French or anyone else.[5] The point here is that just like the peaceful Germans were of no protection to anyone from the Nazis, no matter how many peaceful Muslims there may be, they are no protection for us from the terrorist Muslim leaders and what they are fanatically bent on doing - by their own pronouncements - killing all of us infidels. I don't blame the peaceful Muslims. What would you do if the choice was shut up or die?

6. So who are we at war with?

There is no way we can honestly respond that it is anyone other than the Muslim terrorists. Trying to be politically correct and avoid verbalizing this conclusion can well be fatal. There is no way to win if you don't clearly recognize and articulate who you are fighting.

So with that background, now to the two major questions:

1. Can we lose this war?

2. What does losing really mean?

If we are to win, we must clearly answer these two pivotal questions. We can definitely lose this war, and as anomalous as it may sound, the major reason we can lose is that so many of us simply do not fathom the answer to the second question - What does losing mean?

It would appear that a great many of us think that losing the war means hanging our heads, bringing the troops home and going on about our business, like post Vietnam. This is as far from the truth as one can get. What losing really means is: We would no longer be the premier country in the world. The attacks will not subside, but rather will steadily increase. Remember, they want us dead, not just quiet. If they had just wanted us quiet, they would not have produced an increasing series of attacks against us over the past 18 years. The plan was clearly to attack us with terror until we were neutered and submissive to them. We would of course have no future support from other nations for fear of reprisals and for the reason that they would see we are impotent and unable to help them.

They will pick off the other non-Muslim nations, one at a time. It will be increasingly easier for them. They already hold Spain hostage. It doesn't matter whether it was right or wrong for Spain to withdraw its troops from Iraq. Spain did it because the Muslim terrorists bombed their train and told them to withdraw the troops. Anything else they want Spain to do, will be done. Spain is finished.

The next will probably be France. Our one hope on France is that they might see the light and realize that if we don't win, they are finished too, in that they can't resist the Muslim terrorists without us. However, it may already be too late for France. France is already 20% Muslim and fading fast. See the attached article on the French condition by Tom Segel.[6]

If we lose the war, our production, income, exports and way of life will all vanish as we know it. After losing, who would trade or deal with us if they were threatened by the Muslims. If we can't stop the Muslims, how could anyone else? The Muslims fully know what is riding on this war and therefore are completely committed to winning at any cost. We had better know it too and be likewise committed to winning at any cost. Why do I go on at such lengths about the results of losing? Simple. Until we recognize the costs of losing, we cannot unite and really put 100% of our thoughts and efforts into winning. And it is going to take that 100% effort to win.

So, how can we lose the war? Again, the answer is simple. We can lose the war by imploding. That is, defeating ourselves by refusing to recognize the enemy and their purpose and really digging in and lending full support to the war effort. If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. If we continue to be divided, there is no way that we can win.

Let me give you a few examples of how we simply do not comprehend the life and death seriousness of this situation.
- President Bush selects Norman Mineta as Secretary of Transportation.
Although all of the terrorist attacks were committed by Muslim men between 17 and 40 years of age, Secretary Mineta refuses to allow profiling. Does that sound like we are taking this thing seriously? This is war. For the duration we are going to have to give up some of the civil rights we have become accustomed to. We had better be prepared to lose some of our civil rights temporarily or we will most certainly lose all of them permanently. And don't worry that it is a slippery slope. We gave up plenty of civil rights during W.W.II and immediately restored them after the victory and in fact added many more since then. Do I blame President Bush or President Clinton before him? No, I blame us for blithely assuming we can maintain all of our Political Correctness and all of our civil rights during this conflict and have a clean, lawful, honorable war. None of those words apply to war. Get them out of your head.

- Some have gone so far in their criticism of the war and/or the Administration that it almost seems they would literally like to see us lose. I hasten to add that this isn't because they are disloyal. It is because they just don't recognize what losing means. Nevertheless, that conduct gives the impression to the enemy that we are divided and weakening, it concerns our friends, and it does great damage to our cause.

- Of more recent vintage, the uproar fueled by the politicians and media regarding the treatment of some prisoners of war perhaps exemplifies best what I am saying. We have recently had an issue involving the treatment of a few Muslim prisoners of war by a small group of our military police. These are the type prisoners who just a few months ago were throwing their own people off buildings, cutting off their hands, cutting out their tongues and otherwise murdering their own people just for disagreeing with Saddam Hussein. And just a few years ago these same type prisoners chemically killed 400,000 of their own people for the same reason. They are also the same type enemy fighters who recently were burning Americans and dragging their charred corpses through the streets of Iraq. And still more recently the same type enemy that was and is providing videos to all news sources internationally, of the beheading of an American prisoner they held.

- Compare this with some of our press and politicians who for several days have thought and talked about nothing else but the "humiliating" of some Muslim prisoners - not burning them, not dragging their charred corpses through the streets, not beheading them, but "humiliating" them. Can this be for real? The politicians and pundits have even talked of impeachment of the Secretary of Defense. If this doesn't show the complete lack of comprehension and understanding of the seriousness of the enemy we are fighting, the life and death struggle we are in and the disastrous results of losing this war, nothing can. To bring our country to a virtual political standstill over this prisoner issue makes us look like Nero playing his fiddle as Rome burned - totally oblivious to what is going on in the real world. Neither we, nor any other country, can survive this internal strife.

Again I say, this does not mean that some of our politicians or media people are disloyal. It simply means that they absolutely oblivious to the magnitude of the situation we are in and into which the Muslim terrorists have been pushing us for many years. Remember, the Muslim terrorists' stated goal is to kill all infidels. That translates into all non-Muslims - not just in the United States, but throughout the world. We are the last bastion of defense.

- We have been criticized for many years as being 'arrogant'. That charge is valid in at least one respect. We are arrogant in that we believe that we are so good, powerful and smart, that we can win the hearts and minds of all those who attack us, and that with both hands tied behind our back, we can defeat anything bad in the world. We can't. If we don't recognize this, our nation as we know it will not survive, and no other free country in the World will survive if we are defeated.

- And finally, name any Muslim countries throughout the world that allow freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of the Press, equal rights for anyone - let alone everyone, equal status or any status for women, or that have been productive in one single way that contributes to the good of the World.

This has been a long way of saying that we must be united on this war or we will be equated in the history books to the self-inflicted fall of the Roman Empire. IF, that is, the Muslim leaders will allow history books to be written or read. If we don't win this war right now, keep a close eye on how the Muslims take over France in the next 5 years or less. They will continue to increase the Muslim population of France and continue to encroach little by little on the established French traditions. The French will be fighting among themselves over what should or should not be done, which will continue to weaken them and keep them from any united resolve. Doesn't that sound eerily familiar?

Democracies don't have their freedoms taken away from them by some external military force. Instead, they give their freedoms away, politically correct-piece by politically correct-piece. And they are giving those freedoms away to those who have shown, worldwide, that they abhor freedom and will not apply it to you or even to themselves, once they are in power. They have universally shown that when they have taken over, they then start brutally killing each other over who will be the few who control the masses. Will we ever stop hearing from the politically correct, about the "peaceful Muslims"?

I close on a hopeful note, by repeating what I said above. If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. I believe that after the election, the factions in our country will begin to focus on the critical situation we are in and will unite to save our country. It is your future we are talking about. Do whatever you can to preserve it.

Love,

Dad

[1] By the way on Vietnam, the emotions are still so high that it is
really not possible to discuss it. However, I think President Kennedy was correct. He felt there was a communist threat from China, Russia and North Vietnam to take over that whole area. Also remember that we were in a 'cold war' with Russia. I frankly think Kennedy's plan worked and kept that total communist control out, but try telling that to anyone now. It just isn't politically correct to say so. Historians will answer this after cool headed research, when the people closest to it are all gone.

[2] As you know, I am a strong President Bush supporter and will vote for him. However, if Senator Kerry is elected, I will fully support him on all matters of international conflict, just as I have supported all presidents in the past.

[3] Source for statistics in Par. 1 is:
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001454.html

[4] The Institute of Islamic Information and Education.
http://www.iiie.net/Intl/PopStats.html

[5] Note the attached article by Tom Segel referred to in footnote 6 infra,the terrorist Muslim have already begun the havoc in France. [The note was not attached to the E-mail I received.]

[6] I checked this article with two sources - Hoax Busters and Urban
Myths. It does not come up as a Hoax on either. I also then E-mailed Mr. Segel and he confirmed the article was his.

[7] "I don't think the Army or any branch of service runs any type of war any more. It's done by senators and congressmen. There are too many civilians involved." Sgt. 1st Class Greg Klees, returning Iraq veteran, as quoted in the Cedar Rapids, IA Gazette on May 13th, 2004.

[8] There are 64 Muslim countries. This does not count countries like Spain that are now controlled by the Muslim terrorists.

tonight i had michelle and liz over for dinner. reba had given me her CSA box and i had more produce than i could possibly eat on my own. the meal turned out pretty well, and we had a good time watching History Detectives on PBS. michelle told me about this quiz. i am elyse. a disappointment, to be sure.

this morning i woke up and felt towards sociology what i have not felt in years. when i was 18, i took my first sociology class, not even knowing what it was. i was a micro biology major at the time, my first semester of college, and i was taking bio, calc, spanish, and sociology. my intro sociology class was at 8:00 MWF, and i was never late. it doesn't hurt that i had a huge crush on my instructor, a doctoral student who finished up halfway through the semester. she looked like a 13 year old boy wearing a sports coat and she thought we were all stupid. i was transfixed. her contempt for us transformed itself into impassioned lectures. had i found my calling or was it lust? my math TA was who convinced me that grad school wouldn't be so bad. he had long stringy hair, a collection of t-shirts that were free from promotional events, and one pair of jeans that were so full of holes they were more like fishnet stockings. maybe academia would have a place for someone as slobby as me if he could make it.

sociology was very easy for me as an undergrad. it felt like a homecoming. i was an outsider my whole childhood. a feminist in high school. one of only a few liberal families in the woodlands (tm). in my classes i wanted to shout out "aha!" i wanted to find those kids who called me a feminazi and show them the evidence to back me up. i wanted to explain social construction to my elementary school. i wanted my junior high to understand small group behavior.

so this morning i woke up thinking thinking, "thank goodness for sociology!" it was funny, lying in bed being glad that this is what i have chosen to do. then i remembered that all of my friends are taking a prelim today and i am not because i am too something to do it. too chicken? too fucked up? too lazy? too bored? too antagonistic to the world? too resentful of authority? too intent on sabotaging myself? which and why?

despite having an amazingly serendipitous experience today, and then spending an hour floating on the residual joy, i find myself a little grumpy now. shit, couldn't i just learn to expect what i get from life? it is like i always want amazing treats to fall right into my lap. perhaps everyday when i get home i could have at least 4 messages from people wanting to see me. old friends who live far away could write me letters at least once a week. avocado could be a component of every meal. i could have magical hair that would grow or shrink at my will so that i could have different hairstyles depending on my mood. doctors would call me to set up appointments instead of the other way around. food would never rot in my refrigerator. i would always have socks to perfectly match my outfits.