Lessons I Learned on My Recent Road Trip

Recently I drove to Vancouver,WA to visit my sister, nieces and nephew, and my parents who were visiting as well. Here are some things I learned.

(1) Oregon drivers are really good and really courteous. They do not camp out in the passing lane. Left lane is for passing only. They get it.

(2) Idaho drivers are oblivious to minimum speed limits and that whole "left lane is for passing only" thing.

(3) Rest area stalls in Idaho and Oregon are really like little prison cells. The walls are tiled brick, go almost from floor to ceiling, and the stalls have steel doors. WTH? No wonder Senator "Wide Stance" has to go to Minnesota to get some "stance." It's a little claustrophobic.

(4) Eastern Oregon is a wasteland.

(5) Senator "Wide Stance" and his colleague Senator Crapo from Idaho apparently have naked pictures of other senators because the amount of freeway expansion in Idaho is both obscene and notoriously more than is needed. Also, they are both Republicans. So when they start whining about "government spending," have them return that wasted money for freeway lanes they don't need. 6 lanes each, in and out of Boise! Really?

(6) I hate summer freeway construction.

(7) Oregon is a very "farmy" state. I already knew this about Idaho, but Oregon is all about wheat and hay and orchards and barley and cows and goats and llamas and ...you get the idea.

(8) Western Oregon is gorgeous! As is western Washington.

(9) There is a large reservation in mid-eastern Oregon with a casino right on I-84. No, I didn't stop.

(10) The bridges to cross the Columbia River that are east of the I-5 and I-205 bridges are FREAKING SCARY! Never want to do that again.

(11) My 2004 Chrysler Pacifica is a dream to take road trips in.

And finally, (12) I can listen to Adam Lambert's UK version of "For Your Entertainment" (it has more songs on it than the US version) 11 times between my house and my sister's house!

I Was Right. I Hate That!

Think back to my first blog post here. Remember my saying that the only difference between one place or another is the "redneck-to-normal-person ratio?" Today's lucky winner in "Places To Be Ashamed Of" is ................

Salmon Creek (Vancouver), Washington.

As I was heading out of Vancouver to drive back home to Utah, I stopped at the Salmon Creek 7-11 to buy a bag of ice and some snacks. While I was struggling to decide between SlimJim and Jerky, I overheard the female clerk talking to a male customer.

"First, we gotta get rid of that thing in the White House," she said.

"What?" he responded on his way out.

She repeated, loudly, "First, we gotta get rid of that thing in the White House!"

Several thought ran through my head along with the disgust and shock. Snappy comebacks like "racist much?" or "got racism?" occurred to me, but I decided the irony of getting shot by a clerk in a 7-11 was too much, and not the way I wanted to go.

As much as I disliked W, it never occurred to me to hate him that much, to objectify him as an object of disgust and offense. And I wonder if she said the same thing about Bill Clinton. I'm sure she didn't like him, but did she call him a "thing?"

The vitriol and ugliness that I have seen out of some of my fellow Americans since Barack Obama was elected is both alarming and depressing. I'm not suggesting everyone has to love him or agree with him, but a basic level of human respect and some dignity afforded the office maybe? He has, overall, conducted himself in a respectful and respectable manner, I think. And while you might disagree with him and hate his policies, I see no reason to hate him, or call him a thing.

To summarize: There is at least one really hateful, racist beee-otch in Salmon Creek, Washington. And she works at the 7-11 on Highway 99 near the freeway ramp for I-5.

I know I've said before that Obama's election is like turning on the lights in the kitchen at night - you see the cockroaches run. Well, I'm actually getting a little tired of the cockroaches. Can't the cockroaches just stay in the metaphorical garbage can where they belong?

I Am A Proud Citizen of the Glam Nation

July 21 was the Glam Nation (Adam Lambert) concert in Portland, Oregon. My sister and I went. I arrived at 10 am and got in line around the corner from the entrance and sat in a camping chair all day. I met and chatted with other Glam Nationals as we waited in the beautiful Portland weather for our bright and shining moment in the glitter. When the show started, I was about 4 or 5 people back from the stage in a Gen Admit audience crammed full to the rafters.

The audience ranged in age from 8 to 80 (no exaggerating). 10 year old boys with glammy eye makeup applied by Moms and Grannys with glittery walkers all cheered their loudest for American Idol's most flamboyant - and dare I say most talented - alum. It was truly a diverse group: old, young, male, female, gay, straight, glittery,and plaid-clad.

After hours of sitting, then standing, we were thrilled when he did something a little out of the ordinary: he walked the line of waiting fans and signed autographs. I took the pic above as he approached me. Yes, his autograph was a bit of a scribble, and his smile was a little painted on, but still, a genuinely nice gesture from a very busy guy in the early stages of what should be a very long and fabulous career. He thanked us all for coming and being so supportive.

I know folks who are fans of live concerts, and I get that. Especially after witnessing the glamorous spectacle of an Adam Lambert concert. Wow. Just wow.
Yes, there were lasers and smoke and costumes. But to be honest, it's the voice (and his confidence in using it) that makes him a star. IMO, there is no spectacle worth seeing that at its heart lacks in real talent. But in contrast, a spectacle built around real talent should not be missed. And I didn't.

The songs, whether slow, fast, dance, or rock, were performed impeccably and with joy. He genuinely seems to be loving every minute of this experience. And that just adds to the elation of the audience.

The highlight for me, though, was his performance of Soaked. It is a quasi-acoustic performance that really allows his voice to be the star. And what a star it is. Hearing him wail through this theatrical Queenesque rockudrama reminded me of his Idol audition. When he was asked by the judges about whether he thought he was the next American Idol, he said he hoped so, and then he said, "I know I can sang." Yes, Adam, you sure as hell can "sang."

And of course he is soooo easy to look at. He's like Christmas, Channakuh, and Kwanza all rolled up in one: Great gift, perfect package, beautiful, shiny covering, all cinched up with a big shiny buckle.

His most ardent fans (who do tend to be women so far as I could tell) seem to revel in the fact that he's gay, rooting for him to flirt and smooch with his bass player (who was unfortunately absent in Portland due to a serious family illness). Many people ask me why this is, questioning whether this makes sense. But I don't think they (we?) fawn over him because they fantasize about some May-December-Hetero-Conversion Affair. I think they (we?) really fantasize about adopting him. But as Adam would say, "It's all love."

Those who make pathetic efforts to protest or show hate for him (I saw none in Portland)are just kinda sad and pathetic. Gene Simmons suggested Adam had killed his career when he came out in Rolling Stone magazine a year ago. It is a testament to our current level of enlightenment that Gene appears to have been sorely wrong. It really does make me proud to be a citizen of the Glam Nation, even if I'm not particularly glittery myself.

This One Is a Little Off Topic

What better cause to go off topic than the Glittery One?

The word "apocalypse" is being used to describe this summer's bad concert season, with numerous big artists cancelling shows. The stated reasons for the cancellations are not always "lack of ticket sales," but there is usually a lack of ticket sales that accompanies the cancellations, coincidentally.

There is one sparkly exception. Adam Lambert's Glam Nation Tour is (mostly) sold out through August, making his decisions to (1) headline his own tour and (2) perform in smaller venues look like genius. Reviews, for the most part, have been good, with the biggest complaint being that it is over too soon. (I haven't seen he show yet, but I have to agree. There is never enough Adam Lambert.)

Last night he performed at the Ryman Theater in Nashville, the once and current home of the Grand Ole Opry. And this is what he looked like. (BTW, when he broke into his middle eastern cover of Ring of Fire, the famous Johnny Cash hit, the crowd reportedly went nuts.)

As to what he sounded like, check out the hundreds of YouTube videos from his numerous Glam Nation performances.

If you are not a fan of Adam Lambert, I suggest you consider getting on board, because this summer, it may be the only show in town.

Deep Horizon Well + Free Market - Regulations = Disaster

Why do we have stop signs? Or traffic lights? Or painted crosswalks? Because without rules and regulations to provide structure to our driving and walking behavior, we would live in a chaotic world of high risk and certain injuries/deaths.

So why do some people oppose regulation of other hazardous activities - like deep water drilling? Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour says the Gull Oil Spill Disaster is proof that the free market is working because it's costing BP lots of money. If that is the free market "working," then what would constitute a failure in his weird, (delusional?) mind?

(BTW, it's only costing BP money because of the teeny-tiny bit of regulation we already have. The "free market," unregulated, would simply permit BP to shrug and sail away to drill in another location.)

To me, something "works" if it (1) accomplishes its goal while (2) not harming anyone or anything unintentionally. (If BP did this intentionally, that would constitute highly successful environmental terrorism. I don't think that's the case.) BP's goal is to extract oil. *FAIL* And it is seriously (and presumably, unintentionally) harming the Gulf, its sea life, the coast, fisherman, shrimpers, resorts, clean-up workers, etc. (the list goes on and on and on). So, *FAIL* #2.

So, the free market FAILED in this instance because there were not sufficient regulations of safeguards, and a woeful lack of proper enforcement of the meager regulations that do exist. All in the pursuit of profit.

In the purest capitalistic sense, a corporation wants a free, unregulated market because corporations are amoral and they don't care about Imperative #2, "not harming anyone or anything unintentionally." They want PROFIT and don't care about anything else. It's not a corporation's job to care about anything else. But it is the job of people (you and me) to care about Imperative #2 (I'll call it "I#2" from here on out.) So why don't we?

We have been beaten about the head by quotations from Ronald Reagan and Ayn Rand to the point that anyone who wants some rules and regulations to make the corporations (and banks!) behave fairly and responsibly gets called a socialist. No, stopping the rape and pillage of our natural resources, environment, and retirement accounts is not "socialism." Indeed, the merger of corporations with our government, which we are dangerously close to feeling the full brunt of, is in fact the very definition of fascism. (I'm not calling anyone Hitler or Nazis. I'm just pointing out the definition and asking you to think.) Wanting to keep the PEOPLE in charge of the government, and therefore society, is not socialism, it is in fact the most basic tenet of democracy. Don't confuse your political rights with economic philosophy.

It is really very simple, just basic common sense: If your neighborhood had no speed limit, some idiots would drive through at any speed they wanted, posing great danger to you and your neighbors. This is unacceptable, so we impose speed limits, and fines for those who violate them. Why is it so hard to translate this way of thinking to corporations? Are we so easily swayed by ad campaigns and propaganda (paid for by the same corporations who want to stop regulations) that we cannot see how the world really works?

Until we grow a pair - of eyes - and really see what's going on, we are doomed to be the patsies of big corporations. Our political leaders are largely already rented, if not owned, by corporations. And with the recent Supreme Court ruling, which ignored and reversed case precedent and added "corporation" to the definition of "person" in our constitution (Can you say "activist judges?), and now permit corporations to make unlimited political contributions to candidates, we are moving closer and closer to realizing the true consequences of corporatism (aka fascism).

I'm not an alarmist, and I'm not going to paint a little mustache on anyone, but the irony of the Tea Party Movement is glaring. It gets HUGE sums of money from corporations. The people in the bag-stapled hats may be populists, but the money funding the movement is corporate. The genius of convincing people to campaign against their own best interests is truly something the right wing in this country has mastered. They've got people ON DISABILITY opposing entitlements, and grannies screaming "Keep your government hands off my medicare!"

We need not fear socialism or capitalism. It is ignorance that will do us in, as it does with every declining world power. Because opposing the idea of stricter regulations of oil companies, banks, and insurance companies - industries that have proven they cannot be trusted to accomplish I#2 - does not make us better capitalists or better Americans. It makes us chumps.