The sweetest bully on the block

It may come as a shock to you that I used to know absolutely nothing about child psychology. Fatherhood has begun to change that to a degree. I figure my still profound lack of knowledge on the subject will manifest itself multiple times over the years, but for now I know this: My little 20-month-old is the cutest, sweetest, most innocent-looking, bully on the block.

Isla has developed a brand of determined assertiveness that would make many politicians cower. Our 3-year-old, Aislynn, is bearing the brunt of this behavior.

Consider if you will the other day, when Isla stole a toy from Aislynn. Aislynn meekly attempted to recover the toy, only to be met with a Heisman-worthy stiff arm. The resulting touch caused Aislynn to reel and exclaim, "Whoooooooooooooooooooooooaaah!" as she ran up the stairs. Upon reaching the top, she pleaded, "Isla, don't push me up the stairs!"

Aislynn's rather compliant temperament (see: wimpy) serves to exaggerate Isla's surliness, to be sure. A number of times last week, a stern "Mine!" from the youngest accompanied by that patented stiff arm would send the oldest running for cover in the downstairs bathroom while registering the complaint, "Isla pushed me into the bathroom!" Isla, meanwhile, remained unmoved by her sister's plight, judging by her furrowed brow.

From what little I've read, the second child is not necessarily more aggressive purely by virtue of being the second child. I am, after all, a second child, but I don't remember being told I was all that aggressive as a toddler. (Mom, chime in any time here.)

So it is what it is: Isla, all 22 pounds of her, has run of playtime, while Aislynn fails to figure out she's older and bigger. To be clear, I'm not at all worried that my girls are abnormal in this or that there's a problem. Isla clearly loves her "Sish," as she calls her. Besides, I have a feeling Isla will find out soon enough there are some people she can't push around - like mom and dad.

That's when the charm will be employed. And there may not be any stopping her then.

You feel me?

AF

When pigs fly

I hate to say, 'I told you so.'

If you're like me, you've noticed a clear uptick in the amount of news coverage devoted to swine flu in the last couple days.

To wit, these headlines ripped from The Drudge Report (H/T): "Airlines will ban swine flu suspects." "Doctors' notes required." "Drug companies to reap swine flu billions..."

For those late arrivers, we last heard of the swine flu in early June, when the media yawned to us that the World Health Organization declared a global pandemic. I said then that the decidedly reserved tone of the coverage of the pandemic announcement was in stark contrast to the breathless hysteria we saw when a few dozen were killed from the illness in May. Moreover, I explained why the declaration was by far a bigger story more deserving of an urgent tone. I also predicted a return to mania in July.

My hypothesis rested on the fact that television (and increasingly, print) news is designed these days to evoke, not inform. And at no time on the calendar is this more apparent than in a ratings month such as May and July. Admittedly, the above linked stories are obviously from print sources. But if the television networks have not already followed suit, they will. (Especially with that juicy drug company story. Nothing demagogues like more than a money-making corporation.) Television is notorious for following the lead of its print counterpart as part of their strange, devolving symbiosis. Rest assured, they'll catch on to the terror of the day.

(And speaking of...)

You feel me?

AF

"When in Rome" Update: The Blog is Mightier

Those of you who are regular readers will remember the first installment several weeks ago of "When in Rome" Wednesdays, a series in which Feeling Fuller explores the vast differences of ways of life within a relatively small geographic area. The first in the series dealt with, shall we say, less-than-thorough road hazard labeling in Southern Indiana.

For those needing a refresher, read up.

It gives me great pleasure to announce that, clearly as a result of the grassroots set ablaze by the above linked post, Greene Co. Indiana has capitulated and addressed the need to fill holes in the road, not just vaguely point them out with neon spray paint.

Feast your eyes on the before and after shots:

BEFORE

AFTER

A big thank you to what I can only imagine was a rabid mob wielding pitchforks and torches at the last Commissioners' meeting. It humbles me to know this blog effected change so quickly.

And if you believe my post actually had something to with this, and it wasn't just some auspiciously-timed rant, I have a set of Greene County road cones I'd like to sell you.

You feel me?

AF

Congress furious over secret program it approved (again)

I really wish I had the imagination needed to make this stuff up.

It seems some Members of our dutiful Congress have proven once again that putting on a political show for the news channels is far more important than playing it straight with the American public.

The piece du jour is here, CIA Chief Panetta's bizarrely timed revelation that the Agency had a secret program to hunt and assassinate al Qaeda operatives that was hidden from Congress. Now some Members are full of (self-) righteous anger over not being told of the program (which, it turns out, was never even close to becoming operational), and are demanding an investigation.

Put aside for a moment the lunacy of a politician angry over a conceived, yet not implemented, program to hunt and kill the leaders of an organization with which we are at war. Put aside also the fact that the Executive Branch has legal authority to direct the CIA in just this way. Instead, get a load of this, which by now may not come as much of a surprise.

Yep. Turns out Members of Congress gave their approval to this program in 2001, at least according to one intelligence official. The soundbites and grandstanding you'll see on the issue are likely to be from Members who were on the Hill then, too. In typical politician fashion, they were for it before they were against it.

Sound familiar? It should, if you remember the imbroglio over who knew what about waterboarding and when. Or if you remember the brouhaha over the AIG bonuses paid for by taxpayers with knowledge of Congress. This is the same Congress whose Members raced to outdo themselves on the airwaves to declare their outrage over that bill, which they passed easily.

And to be fair, the maniacal drive to lead the next 6-hour news cycle with your soundbite conveying hysteria is a bi-partisan affliction.

Which probably means you and I are partially to blame for all this. Apparently we have yielded to a society that is perpetuated by short soundbites, the juicier and controversial the better. We desire entertainment, not information. Context, perspective, meaning - these are not things American society as a whole demands in abundance. Thus, we elect people who leverage these sparingly.

There's probably no clearer indication we value entertainment above all else than many of the people we send to Congress. This group - and I'm speaking largely of both sides of the aisle these days - has an uncanny ability to snatch baffoonery from the jaws of competence. If only their jobs were indeed a laughing matter.

You feel me?

AF

"When in Rome" Wednesday: We're all Romans

Greetings all.

It's been a wild 10 days, so allow me to recap and explain the extended break I took from this blog.

It began June 28, when I left Indy bound for San Antonio, TX, for a major trade show. After three days pounding out leads - editorial and otherwise - I returned to Indy, only to hop in my car and drive to Vernon Hills, IL, where the girls had been staying with the in-laws. Then there was the Fourth, and return trip to Bloomington, all of which made getting to a computer to post impossible or inappropriate.

But the miles logged did impress upon me something important as we come to another "When in Rome" Wednesday: In a real sense, we're all Romans.

During the trip I witnessed several moments of warmth:
- Two total strangers of opposite race discussing the joys of grandparenthood.
- Another complete stranger remarking how cute our little girls are.
- Weary travelers at the airport at 6 AM allowing a young girl to cut in front of them in the security line so she would not miss her flight, without comment (or at least, without audible comment).
- Members of competing companies laughing over drinks.

My point is this: No matter where you travel, good manners remain good manners, courtesy remains courtesy, civility is still civility, and there are some joys in life that are universal. So it seems fitting that before this series pointing out our differences gets too far, I take time to acknowledge that there are many things that make us more similar than different.

You feel me?

AF