I Still Have It There

Now, the Real Shit

Since I've now covered that ground, it's time to deal with the real shit: The 2020 race has begun, good people. And I have to say, and this might surprise some folks who know me pretty well--it is entirely possible that, in 2020, I may be feeling the Bern'. Understand, please, that I was a real Hillary girl in 2016, and that to a large extent, this was somewhat to the genuine annoyance of some close to me, I'm sure. My go-to line was "Have I mentioned yet that I cannot wait to vote for Hillary Clinton?" There was a point to all that. You know, when it came to Hillary, people talked about an "enthusiasm gap." They'd talk about going to vote for her wit' holding their noses. I can't see voting for her, I heard--she just has too much baggage. And this was all from Democrats. My point, was that one could insist on fueling the "enthusiasm gap," or one could choose get get excited about voting for a mightily-qualified, glass-ceiling shattering, first-time Planned Parenthood endorsed candidate. The "enthusiasm gap" isn't a thing. It's you. And I am one who thinks that the Sanders campaign contributed to the Trump victory in 2016, that he stayed in the race far after he was mathematically cooked, and that he spent his time and effort shit-talking the process itself, doing everything he could to undermine the presumptive nominee's credibility until he finally, and I think begrudgingly, endorsed her in July. I absolutely think that Sanders played a role in our current regime under our own little President Baltar, and I think anyone who dismisses this out-of-hand hasn't really done the math. Not that I defend the Clinton camp like Tuukka Rask stops hockey pucks. I can't. Mistakes were made. Hubris did ensue. The candidate leaned too hard on "look at this braying jackass" rather than so much on "I am a really great broad." She chose a horrible running mate who added no energy to the campaign (can't even remember his name, can you?)

But stopping short at "she didn't win because she was a shitty candidate" just doesn't do it. Not when she actually won by more than 3 million votes. Not when the FBI chief dropped a flaming bag of poop on the door on Oct. 28. Not when Vladimir Putin was literally feeding people the weirdest talking points about our girl ever and actively organizing within the American electoral process.

Or, as FiveThirtyEight put it:

Campaigns probably don't have that much impact in presidential elections. Clinton's campaign made some tactical errors but these likely weren't enough to cost her the electoral college, especially given that she lost states such as Pennsylvania and Florida where she had campaigned extensively.

But I am a voter who tends to reset. I tend to whoosh the slate clean, as I did in 2012 to support Clinton, who I despised after 2008, after she fought and hung on, seemingly threatening a big D win and a vital one at that. (The truth is, Hillary had a far more valid argument for staying in than Bernie did--the math in that race was actually darned close, and it was not out of the realm of possibility considering the potential pull of unpledged delegates.)

I believe in starting over. And, my friends, you cannot deny the fundraising numbers. Bernie Sanders does not apparently suffer an "enthusiasm gap."

There is, in fact, only one candidate so far I wish would walk the plank. The way I see it, Barry, this is the time to let these people woo me. And Bernie comes at this from a more powerful position than before. So I might be woo'd, indeed. However, I think that Kamala Harris broad has some pretty good skills as well.

We'll just see how this goes.

Aren't you glad this one wasn't about shitting?

What Is Wrong With People

So, this is a post about shitting. Specifically, about me shitting. So, if you don't want to read about me shitting or about shitting generally, you may just move on.

I usually shit every day at 4:30 right after my day at work. It's just when it happens, and getting it done before my admittedly short drive home just makes the drive a happier experience. I could wait because my home is literally less than a mile away from where I work. But that's a longer distance if you've gone eight hours without shitting. Plus, it makes it possible to run errands on the way home, which I would not want to attempt without shitting before leaving the work-job. I generally despise shitting in a public restroom, but this just seems to be better strategic move and better logistically. Plus that time seems to be a fairly low-volume time for the men's in the front. So: I leave my stuff at my desk, I clock out, I go shit, I wash my hands, then I go get my stuff and leave. It works. Usually.

Except today, I had to shit at lunchtime, which is usually about 2 p.m. I mean, you know. HAD to.

So I clocked out and made my way to the front head. I was in luck. It was completely empty. I made my way to my favorite stall (the one where rolling out the TP sounds like a TARDIS engine), prepped, and sat. Now this was going to be a particularly farty shit. There is no denying this. I knew it. I even gave an initial courtesy flush during the initial run. And bear in mind my position: The handicapped stall is to my right and there are at least four other stalls to my left. I am literally the only shitter in the room.

So I'm executing this ladylike shit of mine, and a guy walks in. And he doesn't hesitate. His gait has no pause, no pondering, no decisions in it, no weighing out values and societal norms. He hears the farting shitting mess in my stall and decides yeah man. I wanna sit in the stall next to that. And, he does. He enters the stall right next to me, despite his embarrassing wealth of choices farther way, and he preps up, sits down, and proceeds to blow his nose.

I'm appalled. I'm taken aback, and I'm certainly feeling shy. What the living fuck? Dude had a fat luxury of many stalls away from me, and his choice is to have a poop buddy? I thought about introducing myself, maybe going for daps under the wall, hey man, how's it hangin, that kind of thing. Instead, I decided...you wanted to sit next to this? You got it, pal.

I gave it everything I had. No courtesy flushing. No shyness. I just exhausted every bit of supply I had, as quickly, as noisily, and as mercilessly as I possibly could. Then I finished my ablutions and went my merry way.

But. Seriously people. There are rules. I think it's in the Constitution somewhere.

Values That I Believe Command Respect Of The Majority Of The American People

• 2013 Chevrolet Malibu (USA Today)
• 12 Reasons To Drop Everything And Move To This One New York City (Only In Your State)
• These Are America’s Favorite Cities for Food (Travel & Leisure

On The Basis of Sects

"Well, if that’s how you think you want to spend your time.” (Ruth Bader Ginsburg's initial response to her nephew Daniel Stiepleman when he pitched her the idea of making a movie based on the first case she ever argued with her late husband Marty)

So, Sunday my Uncle Hat and I saw a movie. He is here for family business and also for a bit of fun here in Rochester New York. And there are some movies he ain't seen. So we have been going to some movies.

Today we saw On The Basis Of Sex, the new biopic of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Enjoyed it well. I am glad to note that RBG herself finds the portrayal to be mostly accurate, largely because she was profoundly involved in the project. And it is a fine film, though I did find myself going over the laundry list that most biopics seem obligated to tick off. This film does everything you anticipate it to do. Here's her first day at Harvard, where the professor calls on two men before being placed into a force to call on Ginsburg, whose answer is far superior. Here's her fighting with the chauvinistic dean. Here's how she found her landmark case. Blah blah blah. Check, check, check.

Fortunately, this movie does it well. Really well. No Oscar love for this thing--not even Original Screenplay, Academy? Really? Oh, well. Perhaps there's too much RBG power in the nominations with the two nominations of the documentary of that particular honorific. But it is a fine film. A little rote, but well done.

Anyways, since I'm writing movies today, let's for my own reference most of all list all the Oscar-nominated films I've seen...and, go: A Star Is Born, The Ballad Of Buster Scruggs, BlacKkKlansman, Bohemian Rhapsody, The Favourite, Vice.

Wow. I've really got some work to do.

Dilly Dilly

You know your life is weird when a Bud Light commercial on the television causes consternation to you. But hey. That's how I roll.

So a Bud Light commercial ran during the Superb Owl that criticized rival beers for using corn syrup. This advertising claim is a disingenuous mess.

Making beer goes like this: You make a sugar soup, and you add seasoning to the soup. You then add a living organism that eats sugar and burps carbon dioxide and alcohol, and you wait. Now, while I don't think corn syrup is among the finest ingredients a beer maker can include in a recipe, it's all just sugar to the yeast. The point being that using a grain syrup in the brewing process is a completely fine practice -- in fact, most home-brewed beverage start with a hot stock pot full of water and a big can of grain syrup. Only the nerdiest home zymurgists steep their own grains. Without pre-fab grain syrup, hobbyist brewers would be fewer and further between, by far.

One of the nicest beers I ever made was a Canadian ale recipe. I made it once, many, many years ago, and I still remember it, because it was sublime. And it called for rice syrup. Why? Because it's "Canadian" ale, which means it is a bit boozier. Rice syrup does little to affect flavor, but because it is pure sugar, it boosts the alcohol content. This is called adding an ingredient as an "adjunct." There are many reasons a brewer might choose one form of sugar over another, but the point is that no matter what form, what we are talking about is not the same thing as, say, adding high-fructose corn syrup to your grapefruit juice cocktail drink thing. It's not like these people are making the beer and then mixing it with corn syrup. The sugar is converted in the process.

Anyway, I ain't the only one talking about this. This person wrote an equally obsessive rant about it. And they also wrote about it at Food & Wine.

I mean, I think the reason this touched a nerve is because it's so blatantly stupid, and we've got enough of that to go around these days.