...A baby is being raised on a relatively modest budget. Without *gasp!* a Bugaboo. Or Baby Einstein. Or $70 baby Nike shoes. Or Gymboree. Or an SUV with front/side/top/back/4th-dimension airbags.*

And you know what? In spite of all of that horrible, horrible deprivation, the kid is probably gonna be alright. With just as much a chance of finding happiness/fulfillment in his or her life as your uber-pampered Park Avenue toddlers**.

My point is not that you should feel bad about your excessive, conspicuous consumption. It's that in the age of 'helicopter parents', anxiety counselors for 3rd graders (!), Ritalin and a bevy of other pres. meds designed specifically to be marketed for kids "diseases" (is Big Pharma the new Big Tobacco?), etc. etc., please realize this: Nothing you are buying...or buying into...is giving your baby an advantage in Life over any of his/her peers that YOU think it is. Just sayin...

*************

[ *-By the way, to everyone saying you need an $800 stroller to get through snow: I've seen MANY $59.99 Walmart strollers make it through unshoveled snowy Minneapolis sidewalks - in one piece. Sometimes cheap, hard plastics - eco-yucky as they may be - get the job done.

I've also met yuppies basically saying that a parent who does not/cannot afford to transport their kids in a Volvo SUV in the Snow BelR are virtually guilty of child endangerment. Guess what, people: happy, healthy toddlers are being whisked around in 12 year-old Corollas with drum brakes, even in the worst winter conditions, with nary a scratch on their soft skin...=]

[** - My sample size is anecdotally small, of course...but most persons I know from pampered, upper-middle-class, wealthy backgrounds are in therapy and/or on antidepressants for a plethora of issues.

The people I know from middle- and working-class childhoods...the ones who didn't get every supposed advantage or means of luxury and pampered and baby ESL, etc etc.?

Most - not all, but most - are doin' just fine, happy without Paxil or Dr. Shrink.

Again: I'm just sayin'....]

New strips from Ruben, Keef and Carol are the highlights of my week!

Furthermore, anybody out there who works for Bair Stearns, Home Depot, CountryWide, Circuit City et al should disseminate this "Corporate Casino" ad as far and wide as is possible in the company...

Once again: nicely done, Mr. Bolling.

{P.S. - Berkeley Breathed, r u out there? This is how you do smart, savage satire...get it?}

I thought THIS is what a feminist looks like:

http://socialitelife.buzznet.com/images/2007/11/rosie_110607.jpg

http://www.jamd.com/image/g/77695976?partner=Google&epmid=0

http://www.jamd.com/image/g/3460302?partner=Google&epmid=1

*************

I keed, I keed!

The metrosexual fad jumped the shark when South Park brilliantly satired it years ago, in a classic episode culminating with - you guessed it - a Metrosexual Rights Parade.

[The Queer Eye for the Straight Guy gang were also revealed to be evil Crab People. If u don't watch SP, don't bother asking...=]

Sure, metrosexuals abound in High School Musical (Zac Efron) and on American Idol - but in the real world, straight guys have once again discovered that it's okay to, you know, look straight. Wear a t-shirt and jeans. Spend less than 5 mins on their hair. Scratch their nuts. And so on.

Umm, I don't think the vitriol directed towards the author is because she is pretty and white.

It seems to be more because she is (or puts herself across as)a vapid navel-gazer...and frankly, over the years Salon has done more to champion such people as "writers" {Debra Dickerson, anyone?} than people who actually have any acuity or depth of writing talent.

Alice Sebold is also pretty (to me, at any rate) and white - but if Salon chose to publish an excerpt from one of her, I'm guessing the response would be quite different.

Nobody has mentioned/seemed to notice this angle: the author's photo accompanies the article - and she appears to be at least reasonably physically attractive.

Hence, the selling point of her book would be that a pretty girl has a hard time going about a one-night stand...

But what if her photo wasn't included? OR, what if her photo did appear - and she was quite lacking in the beauty department?

How would it influence you - or other potential readers out there? Would her tales have any worth if the answer she sought turned out to be a white elephant in the room? (I.e. - You fail at picking up men for one-nighters because you are not pretty.)

IMO, it would've be a more interesting excerpt WITHOUT her photo being present...

There's a true story from a couple years ago in which PETA decried the use of a donkey as a method of carrying out a terrorist bombing attack by Palestinians on Israelis. Animals should not be made to suffer in wars, they said.

And they're right, of course...but when asked whether they had any comment about the humans killed and/or suffering from the attack, PETA basically said it had no opinion about that.

I see an analogy in the PETA criticism and Lynn's column on how the Iraq war affects women - and is a quote-unquote "women's rights issue".

Does the Iraq war affect women negatively? Of course. Should we all be concerned? Of course.

But as Parson Jim mentioned, the overwhelming majority of the dead/injured in this war have been men.

****************

Donkeys/animals AND humans have suffered through the strife of war and terrorism. If PETA had been able to say that - to show concern for human well-being in addition to animal welfare - they'd probably be a lot more successful in their efforts.

Women AND males are affected by the Iraq War. If a feminist like Lynn could bring herself to show concern for the dead/injured members of the other gender, her points might resonante a whole lot more.