So far, the first full week of married life back at home has been productive!
I have been working on moving the rest of my stuff from the cabin to our home "here at the ranch". I had moved a lot of stuff back in September, but it was mostly stuff I didn't use every day--some clothes, papers, tapes, DVDs, etc. This week, I have been moving the rest of my clothes, books, computer stuff, and other various and sundries that have been with me at the cabin for the last two years.
Clothes have been the bulk of the stuff, and I got the last of those here today. I am sorting clothes to determine what can be discarded or stored away for the winter and have been trying to establish some semblance of order to it all. It will eventually get there.
I have gotten most of my things from downstairs at the cabin, and most of what remains is books and music. Trying to move out of one location and into another at the same time is challenging! I am hoping that Kris will remain tolerant of these huge piles of stuff sitting around until I can get it all squared away.
Tomorrow is election day, and I am in agreement with several of my friends who are ready for it to be over so that our country can move forward, and we can enjoy a cease fire in political ads on TV, radio, print, voicemails, etc. It is a landmark election, and I am confident that either candidate will do a good job in office. I am looking forward to getting up in the morning and voting and watching how it plays out over the remainder of the day.
Is it an historic election? That was the subject of our dinner conversation. I am convinced that the word "historic" should be reserved for desciribing events that have already happened--events that we look back on and can see that they caused a paradigm shift, or drastically altered the course of human events; by that definition, describing this presidential election as "historic" seems premature to me. I am sure that expert linguists could debate this for hours, and a good search of Webster's dictionary might give an adequate answer. However, given my own understanding of the word, it is too early to describe as historic an event that hasn't happened yet and hasn't truly changed the shape we are in for better or for worse. I am sure that George Carlin might have something to say about this, were he still with us. Maybe Lewis Black or another equally insightful, intelligent soul will weigh in on this one day.
The media is influencing this whole election process way more than they should, as exemplified by the fact that CNN has already set up its election website with election results (a 0% tie thus far) a whole day ahead of the time when initial numbers should begin to roll in. What happened to unbiased news reporting--what we enjoyed in a day in age when it wasn't the media's job to project and declare winners?? I think the media's involvement today subverts the whole political process as it was originally intended by the founding fathers!
That's all that I can write for the time being before my brain turns to jello at thjs late hour. I'm off to bed!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Pumpkin,
I don't know that I completely agree with you. The term *historic* can also mean significant, monumental, of lasting importance. It is with that regard that I believe the media is referring to this as an "historic election". However, having said that, I believe that each presidential election is historic in that it will forever change this country's course of events. Additionally, this particular election is even more significant because of Obama's potential to win the election.
PS - I forgot to say that I love you and I'm glad you voted today, even though you voted wrong. LOL
Post a Comment