What are you doing right now?

Have you noticed the shameless self-promotion that goes on in those Facebook lines where you write in what you're doing? Things like, “Lisa is tired after my latest marathon.” or “Bill is feelin’ the burn after going to the gym.” or “Jenny is so proud of her daughter who just won the Miss Junior Barbie competition.”

I’ve decided to get into the act with a few self promos of my own:

“RPC is ecstatic that his son was just paroled from prison.”

“RPC is cracking walnuts on his washboard stomach.”

And how about the ones that change at least 4 times a day. “Chuck is leaving for work.” “Chuck is going home.” “Chuck likes pancakes.” “Chuck is taking his kids to soccer practice.” Do these people check in with Facebook before everything they do? Do they wake up a few minutes early to make sure they have time to leave a Facebook message so that all their friends know their morning’s first dramatic event? “Steve is waking up and heading to the bathroom with a good book.” Here’s a news flash: No one cares that much that you’re thinking about what to have for breakfast!

Really though, I like Facebook. It’s cool to have the chance to check in with people who you haven’t heard from in a long time and find out what they’re up to. I like to live vicariously through those who seem to have dozens of interesting friends who leave meaningful messages for each other. My Facebook interactions seem to go something like this:

Me: Yo! Great to hear from you!

Them: Yeah!

And that’s about it. It’s OK though; I’m sure meaningful communication with interesting friends is overrated anyway.

I think we secretly like Facebook because it allows us to connect with people in a way that doesn’t require real, uncomfortable, human interaction. We feel linked in with the people we know without all that small talk and trying to figure out how to get off the phone. It's like having our own little "O" magazine where we can post only our most flattering pictures and no one gets to see if those pants make us look fat.

Mele Kalikimaka me ka Hau'oli Makahiki Hou!!

Merry Christmas, Happy New Year and a joyful Festivus (the holiday for the rest of us)!

This year has been a barrel of monkeys. Our home equity went the way of the dodo and the losses in our 401K plan have us putting off retirement till I’m 86. We did have a little fun though. This summer we took a road trip to Seattle, blowing our life savings on gas and spending a week creating happy family memories repairing my parent’s drain field. Thanks for the deal on sewer pipe Meliss’, it’s the gift that keeps on giving! We made Lexi learn how to drive the tractor and dig all the trenches (she’s 8 now and needs a bankable skill).

Work sent me to Greece this year, where I engaged in non-stop grueling training meetings in Thessaloniki, as you can see in this picture of me hard at work. We went to the Walker’s (Elise’s sister) house in Arizona for Thanksgiving, where all the men showed how thankful we are for the 2nd Amendment.

I received thousands of letters last year asking why there was a picture of Will Smith in my holiday newsletter (OK, no one even seemed to notice, jerks!). The answer is, “None of your @#*! business! I can put anyone’s picture in my holiday newsletter that I please!!” And by that I mean I was too fat to put in a picture of myself. As you can see this year I am feeling more self-confident (Holy cow, look at those man boobs!).

Elise got a promotion at work. She still works at a local drug and alcohol treatment facility but now instead of a mere receptionist; she’s in charge of making sure they pass their government inspections every year. She also gets all the assignments that her recovering drug-addict coworkers are too brain-fried to manage on their own. This wouldn’t be so bad but afterward they all forget she did the extra work and can’t remember who to thank or give a raise. She is also still a full-time student majoring in social work. She’s busy!

Zach turned 21 this year, causing his father to say, “How the h--- could you be 21 when I’m only 30!? Do the math, it just doesn’t add up!” He’s still going to school at Utah Valley University in their automotive bodywork program. Shockingly, none of the dings or scrapes he has put in my cars over the years have been fixed yet. On the bright side my garage is still full of half-destroyed cars. He and Becca are still an item, significant others, going out, whatever you call serious relationships these days. They even got engagement pictures in the event that they should have the sudden urge to get married. It’s also possible that they are already married and simply haven’t told their parents yet.

Andrew is 18 and a senior. This last year he took a school trip to Turkey and, among other adventures, was chased by a man with a gun who spoke no English when he inadvertently trespassed while jogging (and they say running is supposed to be good for you). He’s finishing high school while getting his beauticians license. He has a steady girlfriend, Louisa, so the answer is, “No, he isn’t gay”. He loves beauty school and wants to work in a high-end salon where old ladies put large tips down his underpants.

Dallas is 14 and started high school (9th grade). He performed in two different plays this year: “Le Miserables” at a local community theatre, where he starred in the ensemble and had 8 solo parts, and at his school in, “The Crucible”, playing Thomas Putnam, where he got to gleefully encourage the hanging of several witches.

Lexi turned 8 this year and started 3rd grade. Grandma and grandpa Hanson came for her baptism in June. Like Dallas, she also was in two plays this year, “The Little Mermaid”, where she was one of Ariel’s sisters and a Christmas production at a local youth theatre. She’s had a great year but, as the official trip Nazi of the family (supreme commander of all vacations), did not feel that her quota of family road trips was filled…maybe next year.

I’m still working from home these days. Meatball and Kitty are the best office mates a guy could ask for. The only office politics I ever have to deal with is who gets to lay closest to my chair. Other than the occasional dog fart and finding my office garbage turned upside down, they are true professionals.

Happy Holidays from The Hansons!!

Trip Nazi

To say my daughter likes vacation is like saying a tornado is a strong wind, a bit of an understatement. For me, I could take or leave going away on vacation. I have nothing against it, but I could be just as happy sitting around the house. Lexi, my daughter, although only eight, is aware of this difference in our personalities and so attempts to compensate for my apparent lack of interest in upcoming vacation plans. Weeks before any planned trip she starts discussions with me about the plans.

"Dad, we’re still going to Aunt Krista’s house for Thanksgiving, right?”

“Yes, that’s the plan.”

“What time are we going to be leaving?”

“I haven’t really thought about that yet. Probably early in the morning”

“How long will we be there?”

“A few days.”

“Mom says we’re coming home on Sunday. Are we coming home on Sunday?”

“Saturday or Sunday, I’m not sure.”

“What are we going to do there?”

“I’ve never been there before so I’m not really sure, something fun.”

“Should I bring my swimsuit?”

And so it goes, Lexi talking about all possible details of the trip as far in advance as possible and me content to do my normal day-before planning. She starts asking about what suitcase she is using a week before we’re to leave and she has it packed days in advance, having ransacked her closet to find all the right things.

Her pre-trip direction isn’t limited to her dad. Her three brothers call her the trip Nazi, since she gives them all instructions for every vacation.

“Dallas, have you packed yet?” she demands.

“No Lexi, we aren’t leaving for a week.”

“Are you bringing your swimsuit?”

“I don’t know.”

“Well, are you going to swim when we’re there? I want to swim so you’d better bring your swimsuit.”

The night before our Thanksgiving trip I was up late (curse you Warcraft III, you have action and adventure). No problem I reason, I can still be up at 7 and we’ll get off soon enough. 4:00 am, Lexi climbs into bed with me to check on our last-minute plans. Having only been in bed a few hours, I feel like someone has kicking me in the head.

“Dad, I can’t sleep, are you ready to go?”

“We’ve got to get some more sleep or we’ll be too tired for our trip.” I plead. (And by “we” I mean “me”.)

“OK, but trade me places so that I can see the clock.”

At 7 my eyes slide open across the slug slime that has congealed on my eyeballs to find my daughter’s face about three inches from mine. “Are you ready?” she asks.

“I need to take a shower and get ready.”

“Mom! Dad still needs to take a shower!”

Mom has been getting ready for the last half hour.

“OK, I’m up.” I croak.

After a shower I feel like I might actually be up for this. All six of us are finishing all the last minute details. Lexi’s suitcase has been emptied and repacked to ensure that she does not have four swimsuits and no underpants. Bags are loaded, snacks on top for easy access so that we can alleviate boredom for the next twelve hours by stuffing our cake holes.

“How long have we been driving?” Lexi asks.

“About an hour.” I answer.

“How much longer will it take?”

“About eleven more hours.”

“Eleven more hours?! You’ve got to be kidding me!”

“Lexi, this is a long trip, why don’t you watch a movie or listen to your iPod?”

“Yeah, remember when you used to measure our trips by the number Barnie episodes?” mom adds.

“OK, but we better get there soon or I’m going to hurt somebody!” Lexi yells.

With six people in the car, we understandably need to stop once in a while for pottie breaks, adding to Lexi’s impatience.

“We’re stopping again?!” she laments.

“Dallas has to go to the bathroom. Remember when we stopped a little while ago for you to go to the bathroom?” I respond, trying to subdue the bulging vein in my forehead.

“He should just hold it! We’re never going to get there if we keep stopping!”
Mom then shares her philosophy that all pit stops should be scheduled. I respond with my two cents that when you gotta go, you gotta go and no one should have to suffer between scheduled bio breaks. “Not everyone has a cast iron bladder like you two.” I reason.

Half a dozen fights over the music selection, a speeding ticket, four stops at souvenir stands and a near explosion over where to stop for dinner later and we finally make it to our destination. Another leg in our larger family journey goes down in the history books. Later we’ll talk about the trip when Zach got pulled over and Lexi was sure we were all going to jail. But first we have a Thanksgiving dinner to eat and the 12-hour trip home.

Republicans Are Crotchety White Dudes

It’s stating the obvious to say that the Republican Party had a bad year. Particularly striking in this development are the low percentages of young people who voted Republican. There are lots of possible explanations for why this happened. I suggest that at least one of them is that Republicans have become the party of crotchety white dudes who seem mad about something. OK, I am probably oversimplifying but it’s pretty clear that for the Republican Party to enjoy a resurgence, they are going to have to be more inclusive. Clearly the biggest problems faced by the party in this election were an economic meltdown and one of the most unpopular Republican presidents in history. However, demographics don’t favor Republicans going forward if they can’t change the trend of losing young voters. In my opinion one of the obstacles Republicans face in this regard isn’t so much their message as their tone.

Republicans have garnered the reputation as the smear party. A general attitude seems to pervade the party that says, “We’re right, and you are idiots.” I think this attitude was personified by George W. Bush and his “my way or the highway” administration. The party regularly impugns or ignores the press, claiming that their view is seldom represented in the mainstream media, justifying a generally hostile approach to press relations. Mouthpieces like Rush Limbaugh are the perfect example of just about everything I’m talking about here.

To a large degree Republican wins over the last few decades can be attributed to the political influence of Lee Atwater, who was a key political advisor to the presidential campaigns of George HW Bush and others. Atwater knew that elections are decided largely on emotion, not real issues, and that one of the most compelling emotions that can motivate people to action is fear. His approach to elections often meant finding a nasty piece of information that could be used to smear an opponent, using this information to pin a negative label on them, then convincing the electorate that a win for the opponent would end freedom as we know it. The Willie Horton campaign ads during the first Bush campaign was an invention of Lee Atwater. Karl Rove, who was one of the key architects of George W. Bush’s presidential wins, was a mentor of Atwater. We saw the latest iteration of Lee Atwater’s approach in John McCain’s attempts to link Obama to Robert Ayers and ACORN, along with the insinuated label of terrorist.

First off, if the Republican Party is supposed to represent values, which values are represented by the idea that it is acceptable to win an election with smear tactics and lies? It seems to me that the party of moral values and the religious right ought to have a more ethical approach, if there is such a thing in politics. Second, in this new age, where information is available virtually anytime and anywhere, this type of campaign is not only ineffective, but is most likely to backfire unless the claims are backed up by solid facts. The unsuccessful campaign of John McCain and the backlash against Elizabeth Dole are pretty clear cases in point of what I am talking about.

As far as the press is concerned, I would point out that the two largest media outlets in the country are Fox News and Rush Limbaugh, so I’m not really buying the idea that Republicans don’t have an outlet for their message. Next time Rush Limbaugh starts crying about some story that isn’t being covered by the mainstream media, remember this: The moment Rush Limbaugh starts talking about it, it’s being covered by one of the largest press outlets in the nation, himself.

More importantly however, the Republican Party needs to learn Public Relations 101: You aren’t going to change the press’s opinion of you by complaining about them or regularly attacking them. Even the greenest PR rep. in any product manufacturing company knows that if a press outlet gives you a bad product review, the last thing you want to do is call them up and argue about it. Instead, you ask the reviewer things like, “How did you form your opinion?” or “What could we change about our product to make it perform better in future reviews?” etc. The aim is to provide a friendly, reasonable face to your company so that in the next review the analyst will be thinking of reasons to like your product. Remember Dale Carnegie? Winning friends and influencing people, that’s the idea. Republicans would do well to learn this. Obama certainly has.

The truth is, Republicans represent what I believe are the soundest approaches to government: conservative fiscal policy, small government and the protection of moral values. However, these principals don’t mean anything if the party representing them lacks credibility. Republicans need to find their own versions of Barack Obama, who can articulate their ideals clearly, without dogma or divisive, bombastic rhetoric. They need to cut the partisan, left-wing-conspiracy-theory nonsense and talk about the meaningful application of conservative ideals to today’s problems.

Opposing gay marriage doesn't necessarily mean you're an intolerant jerk.

In the debate over gay marriage and Proposition 8 in California, most proponents of gay marriage couch the discussion in terms that put the issue on the same footing as the fight for racial equality. This in turn puts everyone who opposes them in the same camp as the segregationist governor George Wallace, who can simply be dismissed as intolerant jerks. However, there are fundamental differences between these issues that seem to be largely ignored.

In the case of the black civil rights movement there was not a fundamental church and state conflict. There was no fundamental religious belief that came into conflict with granting blacks equal rights with whites. This is where the fight for gay marriage differs so sharply with the former issue. In the case of gay marriage, granting this right runs in direct contradiction to the religious beliefs of many churches.

“So what?”, many would ask. “Separation of church and state means that churches don’t get to deny other people their rights based on religious beliefs, right?” If only it were that simple. No question, there are many who oppose gay marriage out of plain and simply bigotry, and this is unfortunate. However, there are compelling reasons why churches are opposed to gay marriage that have nothing to do with intolerance. Let me provide a few real examples of the kinds of issues that have arisen in those areas that allow gay marriage and civil unions.

- In Massachusetts, where gay marriage is legal, church-run adoptive services are no longer able to deny adoption to gay couples even though the churches believe this is morally wrong. The Catholic Church has discontinued adoption services in parts of the state over this issue.

- A church in New Jersey had their tax-exempt status taken away because they refused to perform gay civil unions.

- Justices of the Peace in Massachusetts have lost their jobs because they refused to perform gay unions based on their religious beliefs.

- In Canada, where gay marriage has been legal since 2005, there have been numerous lawsuits where gay advocates target churches that express their view that homosexuality is morally wrong or refuse to allow their facilities to be used for gay marriage ceremonies or receptions.

The point is that churches have good reason to believe that granting same-sex marriage the same status in our society as traditional marriage will directly impact the ability of churches and their members to act as their conscience dictates. In addition to the examples above, there have already been freedom-of-assembly challenges in the US to groups that deny membership or full fellowship to homosexuals. This adds the concern that these cases will be revisited under the circumstance of gay marriage being recognized and approved by the state to the other legal concerns.

Again, some may question, “So what? These are just examples of churches wanting to discriminate against gay people, which shouldn’t be tolerated anyway.” To those who don’t think that there is a moral issue with homosexuality, this is a logical response. However, most Judeo Christian churches view homosexuality as a sin, similar to adultery or other sexual transgressions, and reserve the right to excommunicate, or take other church disciplinary actions, against offenders. They view same-sex unions as an unnatural act against God, and as such reserve the right to take no part in their consummation. Many may disagree with this view, but the First Amendment of the US Constitution prevents government interference in the free exercise of these beliefs.

One of the more nonsensical aspects of this debate are those who say that churches should not be involved in it at all and that by so doing are violating the separation of church and state. This idea shows a lack of understanding of the US Constitution. Who do you suppose is going to stand up for the rights of churches guaranteed in the constitution if not the churches themselves? In turn, who will represent churches in these matters if not their members? It’s ironic, and yet so indicative of the situation, that those who say they are only fighting for their constitutional rights seem to have no compunction about asking that others’ rights be violated.

Our civil rights are predicated on the idea that we are free to do as we choose as long as our actions do not infringe on the rights of others. The rights of one group may even be forfeited to a degree if to maintain them means a gross injustice against the group whose rights are being denied. In the fight against racial discrimination there were few real threats to the rights of any other groups based on the rights of African Americans being granted. It was pretty clear, for example, that the states’ rights being argued by opponents of black civil rights did not outweigh the gross injustices being imposed on African Americans.

The same can’t be said about the fight for gay marriage. In this case there is a real threat to the rights of church groups to function freely in accordance with their moral values should gay marriage be recognized by the state. What’s more, the rights being denied gay couples do not seem to outweigh the potential threat to the rights of religious groups inasmuch as they are not being denied any right explicitly granted to them by the United States Constitution. Church groups should not be asked to risk their longstanding and explicit constitutional rights so that another group can be granted a right that has not been widely recognized.

This is an emotional issue for all involved. There has been plenty of stone throwing by both sides. However, in most of the media coverage I have seen there is a pretty clear bias, painting proponents of gay marriage as the oppressed and opponents as the oppressors, using the black civil rights movement as the analogy. A more complete understanding of the issues reveals that this portrayal is misleading at best. Not everyone who opposes gay marriage is a narrow-minded bigot. There are legitimate civil rights concerns on the part of those opposed to gay marriage, which they have the right to defend as vigorously as anyone else.

Look mom! I'm voting for Obama!

Deciding who to give my vote for president this year has been the hardest election decision I’ve ever made. I have voted for Republican presidents in every election since I have been old enough to vote, much to the chagrin of my parents, who are lifelong democrats. Well mom and dad, come Tuesday you can stop pretending you don’t have a second son, I’m voting for Obama!

Honestly, I have liked Obama from early in the primaries but when the actual campaign started I was moving solidly back to the Republicans and McCain. However, the scales began tipping for me when McCain started with his Ayers smears, they tipped further with the ACORN nonsense. What clinched it for me was the RNC mailing, which on the cover had as the largest and most dominant word “Terrorists” and then, when opened, featured a large picture of Obama. I’m not willing to make myself party to that kind of blatant smear tactic by voting for the candidate whose party is behind it. From my perspective it’s an insult to my intelligence as well as that of all Americans. I find it particularly reprehensible coming from the man who claimed that he was going to run an “honorable campaign”.

It’s true that Obama has also made negative claims against McCain. The difference is that Obama’s attacks have focused primarily on differences on issues and policies. McCain has resorted to the worst kind of Lee Atwater rubbish aimed at getting people to vote for him out of fear of his opponent based on unfounded character assassinations and guilt by association.

Another factor in my decision is the many E-mail messages that have been forwarded to me with the clear intent of misleading people into voting for McCain (speaking of the people who wrote the messages, not those who forwarded them). Obama is the antichrist, Obama is a socialist, Obama was sworn into the senate on the Koran, Obama was born in Kenya, Obama doesn’t say the pledge of allegiance…the list goes on. If these are the best arguments that right-thinking people in the Republican Party can come up with as to why I should vote for their candidate, then I want no part of it.

In my opinion Obama has run a campaign which is about as free of personal attacks and character assassinations as you can expect in American politics. My own thinking is more in line Obama’s stances on the Iraq war, health care and taxes than it is with McCain’s. I am not thrilled about Obama’s pro-choice position but at this point I have my doubts about the influence of the United States President on this issue anyway. More than anything else I like Obama because his way of articulating issues and his general demeanor seem to promote unity over divisiveness, which stands in stark contrast to the obstructive, unilateral approach to most issues from the Bush administration.

At many points in my life I have been ready to stand up and call myself a Republican. Republicans stood for small government, low taxes, fiscal responsibility and conservative moral values. With a Republican president who has done more to expand executive power than any previous president, a war that the Bush administration should have known not to start and the largest federal deficit in history, this is not sounding like the party of small government and fiscal responsibility. What’s more, 7 of 9 current Supreme Court Justices have been chosen by Republican presidents, who have held the executive office 26 of the 35 years since Roe Vs. Wade passed and we don’t seem very close to federal law that would help to reduce the number of abortions in the United States. At this point I wonder if a federal law is even the best answer to this problem.

In my opinion, if Obama wins this election, the Republican Party has no one to blame but themselves. It seems to me they have succumbed to the extreme right of their party, letting the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter persuade them that this represents the views of most Americans. They have focused on finger pointing and character assassination instead of real policy solutions, resulting in a lack of original ideas to address the problems faced by our country. They have ridden Ronald Reagan’s coat tails too long, failing to recognize that what made Reagan great was his use of a fresh approach to conservative ideals to address the issues of his time. Those times have passed and Republicans seem to be fresh out of ideas that would bring new, diverse and young recruits to their ranks.

Fantastic!

If you work as part of a team in a company, you have probably attended one of those meetings where you participate in some form of “get-to-know-each-other” activity. These take many forms. There is “two truths and a lie” where you tell two true things and one false about yourself and everyone tries to figure which is which, with the teller revealing the true stories after some period of guessing. Or perhaps everyone brings a special object that is supposed to tell everyone else something about them.

Generally I find these exercises almost unbearable. First a reality check: Being honest with myself I must admit the reason I don’t like these sessions is because I am very uncomfortable revealing anything personal about myself to other people. With that Freud out of the way, please indulge me in a short rant that explains the other reasons I so dislike these these things.

Before I start, let me say that there are some people who participate that truly tell you something worthwhile. Some people will choose to profess some religious belief, for example. While this is uncomfortable for everyone else, it shows a tremendous amount of courage on the part of the person willing to divulge it and does not seem at all pretentious. There are also those who say something funny about themselves, and who doesn’t like a good laugh?

Now to my rant: Too many people who participate in these things just can’t resist the need to promote themselves in some way. In this distaste I suppose I am revealing something more of myself. I really dislike pretention. But I digress. Invariably there will be someone who brings a picture of themselves running or otherwise engaging in some type of physical exploit and they will work into the tale how this object reminds them of when they ran their last of many marathons or when they last climbed Mt Kilimanjaro. Some will bring an object that reminds them of their long and storied resume, including, but not limited to, their grad. school exploits at Princeton. This is the point when I feel like the person in the joke who goes to finishing school and learns to smile and say “Fantastic!” when they really want to say “Bull----!“.

I am usually in the funny camp. I find if you can make the group laugh, by the time they are done laughing it seems natural to move on to the next person and no one seems to notice that you have told the group absolutely nothing about yourself. I know this is no way to get ahead in the world but the shameless self-promotion in these sessions feels too much like groveling. “Please see how important I am and how neat my life is.” Stooping to such tactics kind of seems like selling out. I think the proof of a person's worth ought to be in the doing, not the telling. Admittedly, this philosophy results in many people not recognizing your worth, as we live in a world where those who say the most are often assumed to have the most worthwhile things to say.