Why The Tour de France Sucks

One of the biggest things I hate about instant replay - in any sport, but especially football - is that you can’t instantly rejoice after a big play. Nope. Before you can cheer, you have to wait to make sure it was really a legit play. Even if no one challenges the call, you still have those few seconds when you’re thinking “ohh, that was great, I hope it stands.” Instant replay steals the spontaneity.

Ditto the impact of drugs on the Tour. On Sunday you see an amazing win. But you can’t celebrate it until Wednesday, after the next drug tests, when you find out whether the win was legit or not. All too often, as was the case with Ricardo Ricco this year, or Floyd Landis in 2006, it was not. It’s like it isn’t even a live sporting event. It sucks most of the enjoyment out of the event.

I really do not care if Ricco or anyone else used some kind of performance enhancing drug. Maybe they cause long term health damage. Maybe not. If I was the one using them, I might be a bit more concerned. But even if they are as terrible as we’re constantly told, cyclists will always use them. So unless cycling officials decide to allow the drugs, the Tour is always going to suck.

They’re growing up.

My babies, that is. This morning as I was getting ready to take them to the library for story time, they followed me into the bathroom and each picked up a tissue. This is not something out of the ordinary; however, this morning, they each carried a stuffed animal (Omi had a baby Elmo doll and Mac had a baby cookie monster - both of which are referred to as “Emmo.”). After Omi got her tissue and wiped her nose (like she does every morning whether her nose needs wiping or not), she put the tissue up to “Emmo’s” nose and coughed loudly. As any mother would, I got down on the floor and hugged her tightly and clapped for her. Why the big reaction, some of you might be wondering? Well, according to the literature I’ve read on toddler development, pretend play is a big milestone that usually manifests around two years of age. But it’s not just any milestone, it’s a major one. It shows that the babies are beginning to think outside of themselves. Hence, my excitement this morning. Today, pretend play; tomorrow, properly using utensils!

And of course, after seeing Omi get all this attention, Mac grabbed his tissue and copied Omi’s actions…except as he coughed loudly, he held the tissue at “Emmo’s” eyes instead of the mouth. But as he looked up at me through those long lashes and big brown eyes, eagerly awaiting my praise, I grabbed him and hugged him and “Emmo” so tightly that all our noses needed wiping by the time I was finished.

One final question: when do we have to stop calling them babies?

Planning birthday parties

My babies will be two in October and already, I’m feeling pressure about their birthday party. I’m not very creative so it’s hard for me to imagine what a bunch of two-year olds might find entertaining. Last year, we had planned a family get-together at a local park where Wheeler was going to grill hot dogs, and everyone could enjoy homemade cupcakes and ice cream. Since the babies were turning one and didn’t know the difference between a birthday party and a bubble bath, the party was more for us adults than the kids anyway. Plus last year, I didn’t know anyone in Shreveport except for family. However, after spending a year here and meeting several other moms with children close to Mac and Omi’s age, it appears that the pressure is on for this year. Two of their closest “friends” (is it possible for a two year old to have friends? I guess I should say, “two of my closest friends who just happen to have children Mac and Omi’s age”) both have their birthdays within a month of Mac and Omi’s. At a play-date earlier in the week, one of the moms asked me where we were having our birthday party. Apparently, she and the other mom are having their parties at the same place - some kind of kiddie gymnastics place - and was curious as to where ours would be. I avoided the question the best I could, because to be honest, I hadn’t really thought about it that much except to decide that it would at our house.

So - and here’s where I get to admit to what a completely materialistic person I am - my gut reaction to these comments was, “OMG, I can’t have the party at home with homemade cake and party favors! They’ll think we’re cheap and no one will want to play with my babies anymore! How is my party going to compare to theirs?” Sad, isn’t it? Immediately, I started mentally preparing an elaborate birthday party where I was considered to be the perfect mom, my children the envy of all their friends, and my house - well, my house wouldn’t be seen because the party would be at a children’s palace. Nice dreams.

The reality (and several of the reasons why Wheeler and I agree that our children will probably hate us as they grow up): (1) this party, and most of their upcoming parties, will be at home. (2) I will serve homemade cake - not so much because I’m cheap but because (and how to say this without sounding conceited??) I like mine better. (3) I am cheap. (4) I don’t want my babies growing up thinking that they can only have fun if mom and dad drop a buttload of money. (5) I know the competition game will start soon enough for my babies, and I don’t see why it should start this early.

As a mom, I’ve discovered that there are enough things about which I can obsess and worry (Did I feed them enough? Did they sleep enough? Are they happy? Are they smart? Why are they crying? Why are they not crying? The list could, conceivably, go on into infinity.) I really and truly do not need to add the pressures of something that my babies will never even remember. Besides, if it’s a flop, I can always blame it on Wheeler.

I Don’t Know Why Anyone Of Any Age Would Want To Live There

But according to the Lt. Governor Bossier’s the place for the four o’clock dinner crowd:

Lt. Governor Mitch Landrieu has designated Bossier City as a certified retirement community and pledged to assist the city in their efforts to retain and attract individuals 55 and older.

According to the LG:

“Baby Boomers are looking for a place that offers a reasonable cost of living, mild climate, friendly people, and fun things to see and do.

Bossier’s got a reasonable cost of living, but that’s because it does not have the other things.

Boy, I Feel Much Safer

Thank heavens the cops caught this guy:

A Minden man was arrested Tuesday after being found in possession of a four and one-half foot marijuana plant.

Gosh. Growing a plant inside your own house. How horrible. Definitely deserves to be jail for that.

Spending Priorities

I laughed at this story this morning:

Some area nonprofits are looking at belt-tightening and fundraisers after Gov. Bobby Jindal vetoed $615,000 for projects and programs pitched by area lawmakers.

Lots of charitable organizations now have to tighten their belts:

Tabatha Taylor said the veto makes her more determined to find money for wellness programs Odyssey Foundation for the Arts offers. The Shreveport organization lost $200,000 through the veto. . . .

Centerpoint, a Shreveport agency that provides referrals and help for homeless and poor individuals, will have to find money for operating expenses after losing $40,000 to a veto.

Now the funny part:

Some local agencies escaped the governor’s pen.

The Shreveport Regional Sports Authority will get $350,000 toward a cash bid fee for the 2009 Bassmaster Classic Tournament.

Improving public health and helping homeless people - Bad. Catching big a** bass - Good.

I know, I know, there’s an objective reason for the cuts. It’s not just that Republicans hate poor people, or that the Odyssey foundation was created by a Democrat, or that your average bass fisherman is much more likely to vote for PBJ than your average social worker. I know that the buzz word is fiscal responsibility. I just wish that when politicians of any party decide to trim wasteful spending that they’d spend a little time considering what actually makes spending wasteful.

Most politicians, I think, consider wasteful any spending on any project they do not like. A better idea is to define it as money that does not accomplish what it is supposed to accomplish.

I personally would not spend 350k on a bass tournament. I don’t really care about bass or bass fisherman. That does not mean I think it is wasteful spending. Probably the tourney would bring in some money. Probably the exposure for the region is beneficial. I’m not convinced, but I see where those things are possible. So if someone does think this is a good idea, I would allow it. But, if the tournament never happened, or if it did not provide the benefits it was supposed to, then no money next year.

All this is to say that when it comes time to trim the budget, the number one thing that ought to lose money is . . . “the insane war on drugs”. Regardless of whether drugs are good, bad, or indifferent, I defy anyone to think of any government program that has cost more and accomplished less.

John McCain for POTUS?

Until today, I was about sixty, maybe even seventy per cent sure I would vote for John McCain if I decided to vote. Then I saw the following three stories.

First:

John McCain was interviewed Friday by the New York Times, which published a summary in this morning’s edition. The Times recounted a question-and-answer with McCain on the subject of gay adoption as follows:

Mr. McCain, who with his wife, Cindy, has an adopted daughter, said flatly that he opposed allowing gay couples to adopt. “I think that we’ve proven that both parents are important in the success of a family so, no, I don’t believe in gay adoption,” he said.

That’s just ignorant. Obviously, “both parents are important in the success of a family” but the question was about adoption. You know, where one or both of the parents are no longer around. In no adoption will “both parents” be present; that’s why there’s an adoption.

Of course, by “both parents” he could have meant one male and one female parent. But that’s ignorant, too. There is no evidence that gay couples are any better or worse parents than hetero couples. Here’s the conclusion of an American Psychological Association report that summarized a number of studies about gay parents:

In summary, there is no evidence to suggest that lesbian women or gay men are unfit to be parents or that psychosocial development among children of lesbian women or gay men is compromised relative to that among offspring of heterosexual parents. Not a single study has found children of lesbian or gay parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents. Indeed, the evidence to date suggests that home environments provided by lesbian and gay parents are as likely as those provided by heterosexual parents to support and enable children’s psychosocial growth.

John McCain, though thinks “we’ve proven” that hetero couples are inherently better parents. I suppose if he had been confronted with the actual proof, he would have just dismissed it as pointy headed intellectualism. I expect that kind of wilfull ignorance from the pulpit; a President ought to be a bit better educated and more fair minded.

The second reason I can’t vote for him? He’s got as much respect for individual liberty and freedom of speech as George Bush.

And finally - and this has been a big issue all along - the courts. Ed Brayton does a great job outlining why a McCain packed court would be scary indeed. What’s left of the fourth amendment would be gone. There would be no separation of church and state. Free speech rights would disappear. Due process? Equal protection? Hahahahahahaha. But we’d all be able to pack heat wherever we want.

“Patsy Jindal”

John Derbyshire on Louisiana’s “academic freedom” law and Bobby Jindal as vice president:

The creationists have pulled off their little stunt once again, and Bobby Jindal has been their patsy. I know there is a pro-Jindal factor among my colleagues here on The Corner, and I’m not stepping on toes for the fun of it. I must say, though, I can’t see voting into national office a guy who is duped as easily as this into acting against his voters’ interests. I’d prefer that my President or Vice President not be such an easy mark for a gang of sleazy confidence tricksters.

How did he vote against our interests (other than making all of us look like ignorant fools, that is)? In short, by setting up local school boards for big losses in lawsuits:

Whether or not the law as signed is unconstitutional per se, I do not know. I do know, though — as the creationist Discovery Institute that helped promote the Act also surely knows — that the Act will encourage Louisiana local school boards to unconstitutional behavior. That’s what it’s meant to do.

Some local school board will take the Act as a permit to bring religious instruction into their science classes. That will irk some parents. Those parents will sue. There will be a noisy and expensive federal lawsuit, possibly followed by further noisy and expensive appeals. The school board will inevitably lose. The property owners of that school district will take the financial hit.

Where will the Discovery Institute be when these legal expenses come due? Just where they were in the Dover case — nowhere! What, you were thinking that those bold warriors for truth at the Discovery Institute will help to fund the defense in these no-hope lawsuits? Ha ha ha ha ha!

Helping to defend creationist school boards in federal courts is not the Discovery Institute’s game. Their game is to (a) make money from those spurious “textbooks” they put out, and (b) keep creationism in the news so that they don’t run out of lecture gigs and wealthy funders. So far as those legal bills are concerned, Discovery Institute policy is: Let the dumb rubes fund their own stupid lawsuits.

It’s only a matter of time.

A Bike Post

“Random” is a blogging cliche. Instead, here’s an assortment of bicycle related stuff.

First, over in the links, under “Bike Stuff” I’ve added links to some S’port area rides, both road and mountain. I’ve ridden at least part of most of them, so if you want more information, let me know.

Second, it’s hot outside. We did 75 miles yesterday, about 60 of which was enjoyable. Around that point I noticed that I had chill bumps even though it was about 95 degrees outside. Yup. Dehydration. Soon afterwards I lost all power. What had been a nice 20-22 mph cruise became a 14-15 mph death march. Thankfully it happened close to home and two other riders were kind enough to escort me. Or I gave them an excuse to slow down and relax. Either way, I appreciated the company. I got home just before I started talking about all the pretty colors. Once there, I drank half a bottle of apple juice and ate a bag of potato chips. After that, all was well.

Third, just to prove that what doesn’t kill you can only make you stronger, I did a 50 mile solo route this morning. Nice ride, though a bit windy.

Fourth, generally, my opinion is that you can never have too many bikes. I own five: My regular roadie, my extra roadie, my mountain bike, my errand running, pull the kids in the trailer beater, and the tandem. Bike Snob NYC , perhaps the greatest bike blogger, though, thinks you can have too many bicycles. He might be right, but I still think I’m o.k. All my bikes serve unique purposes. The roadies can’t go on the trail. The mountain bike can go on the road, but not for long. Not comfortably or fast, at least. The beater is for rides when I don’t want to put on the cycling regalia - especially the shoes - and don’t want to be in the aggressive position of the other bikes. The tandem, obviously, is sui generis. The closest my collection comes to excessiveness is my extra roadie, which I bought a few years ago while my regular one was in the shop. That certainly sounds ridiculous, but in my defense: 1) my bike was going to be in the shop for six weeks; 2) that was six weeks of perfect spring weather that I really needed to use for training for my favorite century; 3) the bike, which I bought for a hundred bucks, was a really nice 1994 Trek 2300 that originally retailed for $1,500. Still, even if I have too many bikes, my car is eight years old, so I don’t feel too self indulgent.

Fifth and totally unrelated to cycling, I am unbelievably sick of Brett Favre. It’s always been annoying watching Packers games and having to endure the man crush every freakin’ announcer on every network has on him. All you ever hear is what a competitor he is, how he’s a certain hall of famer, what a leader he is. Meanwhile he’s 10/30 with three interceptions. Then last season was the year long love fest before he retired. I only made it because I though “at least he’ll be gone after this year.” But it’s now been five moths and HE JUST WILL NOT GO AWAY. I can not even remember the last time I watched SportsCenter without hearing something about Brett Favre. Just go away already. Please.

Will There Be Cobbler At The End?

In the Times today:

Rally for Peach march set for Saturday

The monthly Rally for Peach march is set for Shreveport’s Ledbetter Heights Neighborhood and will begin at 11 a.m. Saturday at First United Methodist Church, 500 Common Street.

The march, which ends at the lot on the corner of Christian and Travis streets, is a nondenominational event and is open to everyone, including ministers, city leaders and law enforcement officials.

I wonder how long until they change it, and if that made it to the print edition. Or maybe this has something to do with the War on Obesity.