perfume and airplanes

if there are two things that don't mix, it's your perfume in the seat next to me. and just so you know, i'd rather inhale the stench of whatever flavor of b.o. you're trying to hide than the toxic fumes of your frilly fragrance.

this rule also applies to offices, ballgames, concerts, and any and all other closed-quartered events during which you are subjecting me to your bad taste in aromas. trust me, you smell a whole lot worse with it than you would without...

~k

the long road home

it began at 1:00 pacific time, yesterday, when i left the office for the airport.

i parked, flagged down the shuttle, changed shuttles, was dropped off at the terminal, checked my tiny bag (i have to check my fucking bag because i travel with liquids, many more than will fit in 3-oz. containers inside of one small baggie. it royally pisses me off that i have to check my bag, and i'll probably never stop bitching about it, or that the inconvenience of travel does not make me feel safer on board planes, only more annoyed than usual), made my way through security (again, in case my annoyance sentiment was somehow unclear in my earlier parenthetical sidebar, i will reiterate again just how fucking annoying it is to deal with the "joys of traveling", the tsa in particular, and their really dumb rules), put down some cash for an overpriced piece of crap wrap, and sat down to wait to board.

we were meant to board at 3:00. at 3:15 the plane arrived. we boarded at a wee before 4. twenty minutes later we unboarded. at 5:00 we boarded a new plane. at 5:30, we were in the air.

at 10:30 i landed in st. louis, two hours later than i had planned to land in st. louis.

by the time i picked up my checked duffel bag, made my way to the rental car line, and got into my car and on the road, it was 11:30.

i pulled into my brother's driveway at 1:45 am.

it took me over ten hours to get from southern california to southern illinois. and to add insult to injury, it's snowing. and it's really, really, really cold. and i hate the cold. and i hate snow even more. thank goodness i love my family.

because i begin my trip back to southern california in 32 hours.

~k

manic monday

i almost never rant about my day job. because, well, i am one of those lucky people who digs a day at the office, and it leaves little to rant about.

but today.

today is different.

i just closed my door to cry. because after spending the last two fucking months pouring over every last detail for my 2009 budget, i just got a please-fix-it email from the budget guru that may as well have been written in japa-fucka-nese.

i hate numbers, i hate excel, i hate budgets, i hate today, and i need booze. NOW! where's that damn bottle i promised to leave in my bottom drawer for just these emergencies?

being kbd ain't all it's cut out to be. at least not today :(

~k

the light beacons

thanks to a reality check (i heart you, humanitarian friend!), my path has become a wee bit more clear.

i don't want to be a politician. i can't be. i wouldn't be okay compromising really important things for the sake of other really important things. i wouldn't be able to sleep at night. i would let politics and the deal-making break my spirit.

but because i do love me some politics, and believe that the gods had more in mind when they decided me a worthy recipient of this gift of gab, i'll be watching from the sidelines. and reporting to you, my thirteen readers, the whispers i hear from city hall, and whether or not your elected officials are being true to their message...

~k

mayor hater

over the course of the last few weeks, i have decided that mayor villaraigosa is just the type of candidate the newer change-generation of politicians should be looking to take over in the coming years.

the reasons are many, and i will admit to probably being somewhat unfair in my assessment, but part of the greatness in living in los angeles is that i get to be as big of an asshole as anyone else who judges our politicians.

first of all, i am disheartened by the villaraigosa political machine. his campaign depends solely on unions, his connections, those who owe him favors, those he controls using fear, and manipulating his base with promises he cannot carry out. sounds like politics-as-usual you say? why yes, i agree. this is precisely why we need to CHANGE our politics!

secondly, he won't debate the other nine candidates (those folks no one has ever heard of) who happen to be running against him. why won't he engage in a debate? my guess is that he's not smart enough to hold his own, probably doesn't have enough knowledge of the issues and how to resolve them to score any points, and clearly lacks the confidence to try and the commitment to improving los angeles to hone in on what concerns angelenos and how he might position himself and the city to move in a brighter direction.

thirdly, his personal choices, as well as his reputation for being a philandering man-whore, are shining examples of just the kind of poor judgment we don't really need in politicians at a time when our world is on the brink of financial, social, and psychological ruin.

and fourthly, i just don't think he's smart enough to run a city as complex, diverse, and persnickety as los angeles. if i weren't so much of a school snob / intellectual elitist, i might not be so turned off by the fact that he attended the people's college of law and unsuccessfully sat for the california bar four times (yes, i did say he failed the bar four times), but i am and i am, and i judge accordingly.

so my response to the following will come to no surprise to you (my eleven readers, bless you!) :

the whispers from inside the campaign go something like this, "mayor villaraigosa is going to run for president".

my question, "president of what? the people's college of law?"

"no bitch, president of the united states of america".

i laughed out loud, and i even pissed a little in my pants, cuz as much as i hate to be the bearer of bad news, 'tis only the republicans that put dumbshits in the white house. and not even they would stoop so low as to put a 4-time-bar-failing graduate of the people's college of law in the seat of leader of the free world.

and i am more likely to vote for dog catcher for mayor than cast my ballot to re-elect antonio.

~k

enough already! tax cuts won't cut it!

and you know how i know tax cuts won't cut it? because the g.o.p. has been cutting taxes with fervency the past eight years, the past couple in particularly (in an effort to stave off this economic black hole we now find ourselves flailing about), to NO F'ING AVAIL! dear g.o.p., your economic theory is a big fat loser. and that's why you were big fat losers in the elections of 2006 and 2008.

my favorite g.o.p. hissy fits in response to the obama administration's economic stimulus plan:

(1) john mccain, "this is generational theft."
(2) john boehner, "the bill that was about jobs, jobs, jobs has turned into a bill about spending, spending, spending."
(3) lindsey graham, "[the bill] stinks!"

first off, yeah, it's a spending bill. duh. we need to spend money to put folks to work. we need to rebuild roads, bridges, levees, and guess what? that requires spending. we need to upgrade the grave inefficiencies in our healthcare system. guess what? costs money. and guess what else? creates jobs. kinda like upgrading the computers in the state department, right? costs money, creates jobs, and creates greater efficiency in a department that needs to be run like a well-oiled machine.

bottom line, dingdongs, we have to spend money to create jobs.

next, "generational theft" you say? are you fucking kidding me, senator mcsame? you voted for a $2.5 trillion tax cut, and have the nerve to stand before america and call this "spending bill" generational theft? after your last eight rounds of tax cuts have done so much to keep the stock market from crashing, nearly 3 million jobs from being sucked down the toilet, and our ongoing use of u.s. tax dollars to build roads and schools in iraq? can we say out of touch? i think we can.

and lindsey graham. blech...

i also love, love, love, and love me some more all this chitter chatter and repulsion over our deficit. when bill clinton brought our deficit to a nil, the g.o.p. went on and on and on about how deficits don't mean anything. who cares about the deficit. no biggie. who cares if the china's of the world hold the notes on american debt. it doesn't matter. and now all of a sudden, the right wingers want to bitch, moan, cry, and carry on about how atrocious it is that we're entering in the deepest depths of american debt, it could even, gasp, reach 13% of our gdp in the next five years.

but honestly, i can rant and rave all i want about the hypocrisy, the lunacy, the complete and utter lack of being in touch with the woes of the american people. but y'all'll just cast me thoughts aside as another liberal tirade. so what i'll do then, is turn to one of your own.

i think andrew sullivan said it best in his post this week,

"Here's why they are not being intellectually honest... The GOP has passed what amounts to a spending and tax-cutting and borrowing stimulus package every year since George W. Bush came to office. They have added tens of trillions to future liabilities and they turned a surplus into a trillion dollar deficit - all in a time of growth. They then pick the one moment when demand is collapsing in an alarming spiral to argue that fiscal conservatism is non-negotiable. I mean: seriously.

The bad faith and refusal to be accountable for their own conduct for the last eight years is simply inescapable. There is no reason for the GOP to have done what they have done for the last eight years and to say what they are saying now except pure, cynical partisanship, and a desire to wound and damage the new presidency. The rest is transparent cant."

in a republican nutshell...

the end.

~k

diahrrea cha cha cha

to do list for today:
buy a muzzle

(proposed remedy for diarrhea of the mouth, brought on by excessive amounts of alcohol)

~k