Feb
25
2009

  Obama Was On TV?

I logged into facebook to update my status for the last time (I'm giving up facebook for Lent), and was surprised to see that people had been watching Obama address the nation. That man just loooves to be on TV, doesn't he? He was on CNN when Terry and I were at the Jiffy Lube yesterday waiting for the oil change on the truck. And he's back on TV again tonight?

I totally missed it. Terry wanted to watch "Baby Mama" on DVD after dinner tonight, and I agreed, but only if we could start it immediately after dinner, since I've got to get to bed early since I've got to be in town for a 9:30am meeting tomorrow morning. So I guess we were watching the movie while Obama was on the air.

Whatever, I'm sure I didn't miss much. What would he have said? Let me guess: The stimulus plan isn't perfect, but it's necessary. Fixing the economy will take time, but we're up for the task. We need bipartisan support to get through this difficult period. Yada, yada, yada.

Can I guess what he DIDN'T say? How about: The government is going to obfuscate the extent of the national debt so you citizens won't realize how much of the nation's wealth will be siphoned off to foreign holders of Treasury bonds over the next several generations. The spending bill is completely political, it is intended to placate voters, we all know it will have no positive economic impact, but you dumb rubes out there won't realize that, and you'll think that any recovery is thanks to my plan.

I've got to imagine that the administration is smart enough to know that its plan really isn't going to cause any material improvement in the economy, but that it is just using its' "stimulus" to placate the electorate and give the appearance of doing something about it. When all they can really do is let it run its course. Personally, I would prefer the hard, fast crash to get it over with. Let the failing businesses go bust, nationalize the failed banks, evict the deadbeat homeowners, and let more successful businesspeople take over the ruins of the failed companies. You don't need government "stimulus" for all that to take place, just let the normal bankruptcy, foreclosure, and liquidation laws continue as usual. But I understand the political preference to drag out the "correction" as long as possible, so that only incremental bad news hits the airwaves every day, and people get used to it, and public unrest is avoided.

Really, unemployment is the only thing the government is really worried about. With high unemployment comes civil unrest, because once you get a lot of people with no jobs, no money, and no prospects, you get increased demonstrations, protests, and crime. I'm not in favor of THAT, either, so that's the only reason I'm not completely sick about all the wasteful government spending. If it keeps the population from getting too uppity, then I'm ok with that, even if I know it's just for political reasons.

It's a good thing Terry is giving up economics for Lent, he'd be beside himself over the news coverage and analysis I'm sure the speech tonight will beget. And since we have only between 24 and 59 days until we have a baby, I need him to focus. I cannot get the whole house cleaned, decorated, and organized by myself in that timeframe. I get tired after only a few hours of work. Terry, on the other hand, will be able to get it all done on time & on budget (that just sounded good, we don't really have a budget, although he did save $400 by getting the 30,000 mi. service on the Lexus done at Jiffy Lube instead of the Toyota dealer today).

I'm going to be tired after all my appointments tomorrow (a nurse, a doctor, mass, the pharmacy, bank, and grocery store), so I don't expect to make any progress around the house. Thursday, on the other hand, might see a paintbrush. Gotta paint the trim. I can probably do the trim in both rooms in one day without wearing myself out too much. Then maybe I can paint the master bath or hallway on Friday.

We've pretty much decided on what carpet we want in the master bedroom, Terry is going to see if we can get it privately installed for less than the carpet store will charge. We saved a bundle by hiring an independent guy to install our hardwood floor in the studio, laundry, and sewing room, and he and his team did a great job. Hopefully, he's got a friend that does carpet. There's no way around the fact that the carpet itself is going to be expensive. I want the wool. Once we got those samples down, and I walked over them, it was all over. Wool is so much nicer than nylon. Yes, it's three times as expensive, but I do think it's three times as nice. It's the sort of thing I suspect most people don't notice, since relatively few people (at least that I hang out with) spring for the wool. So I suspect most people just don't know what they're missing. But I've been spoiled by the beautiful wool rug we've got in the parlor. It's a wool/silk blend, and marvelous. And it's beautiful. Not only does it feel good, it LOOKS so much better than any synthetic.

So Terry and I are already ruined for standard carpet. But I can't exactly advocate that everyone get wool, any more than I can advocate getting your olives from an olive bar. I don't think it's prudent to acquire a taste for an unsustainable lifestyle. And I personally think it's easier to be satisfied with what you've got when you aren't even exposed to the alternative. If you're happy eating olives from the $2.50 jar, why mess that up by acquiring a taste for $12/oz olives from the olive bar? For that reason, I tend to shy away from very good wines. I'm currently happy with the middle-of-the-road stuff, and on the occasions that I do run across an extremely fine glass of wine, I savor it but keep in mind that I need to enjoy it then forget about it, view it as a fluke. Because if I restrict myself to only fine wines, I won't like the average stuff anymore and I'll be blowing $40+ per bottle instead of $10+, and that really wouldn't be sustainable for us. It's not a problem, since it's mostly when we go out to fine restaurants that I get the good wine, and the whole meal is wonderful, so it's all in context and I don't expect to get that at home.

But I do want wool carpet at home. And Terry is in agreement. We did decide that we won't put the good stuff in the nursery, since the kid will be puking on it. Kids don't really get the hang of puking into a bucket until they're pretty old, I think. Terry and I can avoid soiling our nice rug, even if we're sick. And it's going to be the color of coffee, so we don't have to freak out if we spill a little coffee in the morning. Now that's luxury. The carpet in the parlor is the color of red wine, and the color in the bedroom will be the color of coffee. Low-maintenance, baby.

I have to run the numbers, but I might get wool for the nursery, but I'd opt for the FLOR tiles. That way, if any part gets all puke-y or otherwise soiled, a single tile can be replaced without ripping up the whole carpet OR living with the stain for years. Or I might be able to find some other carpet that is equally non-toxic, if not quite as comfortable as wool. I need to do a little more research. I'm skeptical of certifications that are done within an industry, I'd rather rely on third-party data. I think I've become more sensitive to dust etc. as I've gotten older, so maybe it matters more to adults than to children. I really don't know. I do suspect kids can't discern aesthetic quality until they're a little older, perhaps at least 7-8 years old, and even then, only if they're taught to recognize it.