Gotta tell you, the marketing never stops! Now we have a new holiday  --  Thanksgivukkah  -- that occurs, depending on which “calendarist” you listen to, every 100 or 70,000 years. It also has spurned a new product, the Menurkey, a combination of a turkey and a menorah, the candle holder that represents the miracle of eight days that a drop of oil lasted.

It’s like you fell into a Saturday Night Live skit. Every time I hear the word Thanksgivukkah, I think of Adam Sandler singing his Hanukkah song -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUCNAnp2QAI.

Anyway, back to Thanksgivukkah.  It is happening because, according to Wikipedia, it is a rare coincidence “between the lunisolar Hebrew calendar (whose dates reflect both the moon phase and the time of the solar year, and which can have beteween 353 and 385 days per year) and the Gregorian calendar. Because the calendars are not calculated the same way, Chanukah, appears at a different time each year on the Gregorian calendar.” Clear, now?

Thanksgivukkah has provided a few laughs, so it comes at a good time because the Congress is in recess, so no yuks coming from D.C. It moved Boston Mayor Tom Menino to proclaim tomorrow Thanksgiviukkah so the traditionally Irish
town of Boston has joined the fun. Oy Begorrah!

I won’t go on and on, the media are doing enough of that about the faux-holiday. Makes for nice pieces to end the evening newscast in a holiday season. Light and fun.

So, I will wish you all and Happy Thanksgiving and a Happy Hanukkah. I'm a traditionalist.
 

A few stories hit a nerve the past week:
 
1)   The nuclear option exercised by the U.S. Senate. This involved the majority Democrats changing the Senate rules so that only a simple majority is needed to approve a president’s Cabinet nominations and some judgeships. This was done because the minority Republicans abused the previous rule (requiring basically 60 votes to get a nomination through) the last few years (just as Democrats abused it during Republican presidencies. Let me quickly add, the current Republican minority has abused it to a higher level – but abuse is abuse). This is the camel’s nose under the tent. With this precedent, other votes can be moved to this kind of rule, up to the majority’s whim.
 
And that is the problem. I agree the Republicans have abused the rule. BUT let’s not cut off that camel’s nose to spite his face. That rule is one of the things that has kept the Senate somewhat more collegial than the House, where such rules don’t exist. The rule was there to protect a minority from being steamrolled by the majority which could work its will at will. It is not a rule change that encourages comity (with a “t” not an “ed”). It’s a short-term fix to what isn’t a long-term problem. It should not stand.
 
2)   Cell phones on planes. My first instinct was to think, “OMG, everyone will be yakking on flights. ANNOYING!!! The government is wrong to do this!!! But then I read The Washington Post editorial today which said that it favors the decision by the federal government because now it leaves the decision of whether and how to allow personal cell phone use is up to the airlines. Which means it will be a decision made by the marketplace. Which means you and I will make the decision by how we react to whatever the airlines decide.
 
 I go back far enough to remember when smoking a cigarette was allowed on flights. Smokers were relegated to the back rows of the plane, I presume so the smoke wouldn’t annoy the non-smokers. Of course this ignored the fact that smoke
 floats through the air and the non-smokers still were affected. Thus, smoking was banned eventually on flights. Trust me; I don’t want to sit through a flight listening to anyone else’s phone conversation. I hate it enough when I’m walking down the street and I hear phone conversations I truly don’t want to hear. But I do like the idea of not leaving this up to the government to decide. We can turn our views toward airlines now. And I encourage you to do that.
 
3)  The Cheney nuclear family is being blown apart. At least that’s how it appears publicly. One sister, Liz, is running for the Republican Senate nomination in Wyoming, challenging a popular incumbent. She is running to the right, thus says
she opposes same-sex marriage. She has a sister, Mary, who is a lesbian, married, and the couple has children. Mary and her spouse published, on Facebook, their reaction to Liz’ view – and, needless to say, it wasn’t positive. Their dad, former Vice President Dick Cheney, favors same-sex marriage. 
 
Now, what is the problem here? Has Liz moved to the right disingenuously to prove to The Right that she is with them on gay folks getting married? Does she have a religious view that says same-sex marriage is okay but should not be sanctioned by religions that prohibit it?  Does she agree with civil marriages?  She has not nuanced, nor been forced to nuance, her views sufficiently so all I know is she opposes same-sex marriage, therefore apparently does not recognize her sister’s marriage. 
 
I’m not sure and I don’t really understand why the sisters, being raised in a family as political as any that exists, didn’t work through these issues privately before they went public, either agreeing to disagree or agreeing that Liz could say what she wants without risk of Mary responding publicly. I also don’t know that their disagreement is pertinent to anything
other than as a snapshot into a well-known family that has its “issues” as do each of our families.
 
I don’t agree with my siblings on everything. It doesn’t affect our relationships. You respect the view and move on. But,
apparently, not in today’s world of politics and social media and talking heads.


 

As I edge closer to retirement, some things become more real:

What will I do with my days? I know some of this but not all; then again not sure I have to have an agenda for every day either. After all, it is “retirement” which Merriam-Webster defines as “withdrawal from one’s position or occupation or working life.” I do see more household chores in my future though, which is fine with me (and fine with my wife, by the way).

 How do I deal with medical insurance? I don’t mean where do I find it but today, for example, I called my health  insurer to find out why, after years, a prescription I take (it’s a vitamin; one pill so I don’t have to take 20 different vitamins) no longer is available to me in 90-day supplies. They informed me all of a sudden that I can only get a
monthly supply and, of course, for a higher cost. Why? She said: it goes beyond the normal adult dosage. Folks, it’s a vitamin!! What happens when my health insurance issues are more complicated (but the logic of their answers is no more
understandable)?

Which brings up, how do I deal with being on a fixed income? Things like paying a higher cost for prescriptions become more important. Things like a cell phone bill become more important, after all, I barely use my cell phone. I’ve always been a, how you say, “frugal” guy. Is there a word such as “frugaler”?

What hobbies do I have? Well, not many, really. There’s golf. There’s reading. Can I all of a sudden become a skilled home repair guy (my best friends -- member these were my BEST friends -- used to call me “Fingers” because I couldn’t hammer a nail. Oh, and once, as they were helping me paint a new apartment – MY new apartment – when I asked
  where I should start, the two of them said, in unison: “the closets”).

Which volunteer work should I pursue?  Well, first you should do something that you have a passion for and of course, that helps others. Second, that kind of thing needs to be available in the area you’re going to live. So, procrastinator that I am, I’m putting that decision off (too) for now.

Maybe I should get a dog?  I came close a couple of times but realized owning a dog is a bigger commitment than marriage. I mean, you can’t decide to be late coming home because you’re out with the boys; the dog can’t hold it in forever. And, of course, the dog relies on its owner to feed him. You  can’t go away for a few days or weeks without figuring out care for your dog. So, so far, no dog.

I’m on a university’s board, which requires some time that I haven’t given sufficiently so far, but want to. I have six grandchildren, and I’ve barely spent time with any of them, so I want to do that, if they’ll have me. Same goes for my three daughters. I have friends I’ve unfortunately lost touch with because our lives have gone in different directions geographically. But I miss them, so I hope to reconnect.  There’s this blog, which I enjoy doing. And, maybe there’s other writing I’ll pursue.

Of course, there’s always “Law and Order,” though I think watching each episode four times, which I’ve already done, is sufficient. 

For  those of you who were fans of the TV comedy “Seinfeld,” you know it was 
 a show “about nothing.”

Sometimes I feel that way about this blog. When I thought about starting a blog, I was advised by experts (some even over the age of 12) that a successful blog posts new items regularly so that if you do acquire a base of followers, you keep them. When I started this blog, the intent was for it to cover politics, family, language and other topics that might strike my fancy. My plan intially was to post three times a week, a schedule I did maintain for a while. The recent crisis over the federal government shutdown and  debt limit took over the topic here for a while (sorry, my instinct is politics/civility). Since then, though, I’ve had trouble being motivated with with topics that are interesting enough or might provide a smile.

Time went by as I pondered and, thus, I haven’t posted in a while. And/but I need to post to maintain consistency in the blog.

Thus, this is a blog about nothing. Would that it achieves half (a tenth) of the viewership that Seinfeld attracted.

It begins.

Less than 48 hours after Tuesday’s balloting, the lead story in The Washington Post is about Democrats opening their attacks on re-elected New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who some think now is the leading candidate for Republican Party’s presidential nomination in 2016. Do him in, and do him in early, is the strategy.

Down in Virginia, supporters of the losing Tea Party candidate Ken Cuccinelli, the Republican, are turning their fire on the business wing or establishment wing of the party saying they didn’t give him enough money. And, they feel that with more money, he could have made up the 60,000 votes he lost by. 
 
We are back in the muddy water of American politics without even taking a breath after the elections.

Republicans are circling into shooting positions to kill each other off. Democrats are shooting at Christie because they fear his potential candidacy which they and many others see as a more moderate approach to Republican politics. He will be portrayed as a conservative, just watch. As he is about to take over the Republican Governors Association, the entity that helps elected Republicans governors, they will try to tie him to every more conservative governor he visits as he crisscrosses the country raising money and recruiting candidates.

A friend commented on yesterday’s blog post asking if Christie were to become the Republican presidential nominee and Hillary Clinton the Democratic choice, would we see a more substantive debate on the issues instead of on personalities. I
hope so. But my guess is that with Mrs. Clinton’s history and tied to her husband’s, that will become a focus of attack. Also, with Christie scaring Democrats because of his New Jersey, out-spoken, plain talkin’ personality, they will focus their attacks on his public comments and try to portray him as a right-wing nut, even though he keeps winning in blue New
Jersey.

No break in the action, folks.

Tuesday was a win for moderation in the Republican Party. Gov. Chris Christie won reelection in New Jersey, Ken Cuccinelli lost in Virginia and Bradley Byrne beat a Tea Party candidate in a Republican House primary in Alabama. 
 
Cuccinelli came much closer than the polls predicted, losing by only about 60,000 votes to an opponent, Terry McAuliffe, who was considered weak for good reasons. What does it mean? No one really knows but the early analysis will have Republicans jamming the New Jersey Turnpike to pay homage to Christie as establishment Republicans implore him to run for president. Tea Partyers will point to Cuccinell doing well among moderate Republicans (then again, given the choice in Virginia, which I’m told Jon Stewart described as choosing between cancer and a heart attack, not sure what that really means). If I still voted in Virginia, I’m not sure how I would have voted. McAuliffe has never been elected to anything except chairman of the Democratic National Committee and is untested in the ways of government. Cuccinelli holds beliefs that are counter to many of mine. If I flipped a coin, it likely would have landed on its edge.

Does Tuesday mean Republicans will trend back to more moderate candidates? I don’t think so. The Tea Party isn’t done yet. And while the Big Tent of the party is big enough to include Tea Partyers,  Tea Party Tent does not seem big enough 
to include moderates. Tuesday was one battle in a longer struggle for control of the GOP.

There still is the health care debate in trying to decide if Obamacare will work or not. There still is the budget to work out in the next weeks. So Tuesday is a marker in the road, but doesn’t mark the final destination yet for 2016.