Someone Check. Are Bill's Eyes Permanently Crossed?

Yup. Billy fell off the wagon and has been playing with his thingy again. I don't think Bill understands why it is so hard for his regular readers to cope with his nasty habit of frequently changing his blog format.

Bill, remember the contrived "New Coke" controversy? Imagine if Nestle announced it would begin adding raisins to all Hershey bars. What if the Wall Street Journal started dotting i's with a big bubbly hearts? What if District 150 announced it was going to take over ancient Glen Oak Park, cover it in asphalt, and place a big, ugly, new fangled institution there? Oh, yeah. That's right...

This is Peoria, Dude. We despise change. Now knock it off before it falls off!

Lies, Damned Lies, and Blogging

Polly is in a state of flux. Re-evaluating my place in blog world you might say.

There is a lot going on in the world that I would love to blog on. For starters, Thank God the ACLU doesn't have any pull in Britain. How did British authorities ascertain imminent terrorist attacks via air planes? Wide spread intelligence gathering. Keeping in mind the alleged terrorists were targeting international American flights, I think every U.S. citizen owes a big "Thank you and God Save the Queen" to the diligence and common sense of the British government.

Ah... but I digress. What I wanted to write about was the minor controversy swirling about my blog and the numerous pictures I have posted and the false claims as to my identity. I'm not going to justify anything. Dishonesty and fantasy has been repeatedly implemented on PollyPeoria by its author. My attitude has been, "It's just a blog. It's supposed to be fun. I can post anything that I find amusing and represent myself as anything/one that I believe my twelve devoted readers will find amusing." I really didn't think anyone would take an anonymous blog too seriously. There are upscale, upstanding, responsible, professional blogs out there. This just isn't one of them.

Some of the devoted twelve have e-mailed me to disagree. Since I have come to respect a few of them, I'm reconsidering my attitude, my blogging ethics, and whether or not to remain anonymous. I have to remain anonymous due to work and personal relationships that I hold dear. So the real question is whether or not to remain anonymous or remain at all. Well, whether PollyPeoria should remain at all, that is.

I've underestimated how much I've come to enjoy venting by blog. It has been a healthy experience. I have really come to appreciate what I consider to be blogging's biggest perk: My quirky opinions and my tendency to debate endlessly now only annoy those who choose to read PollyPeoria. Those who choose to be annoyed. I no longer (unknowingly) verbally assault people at bars and cocktail parties. My significant other no longer dreads taking me out in public or to social functions. I have been slow to learn that not everyone enjoys heated political discussions, and some even get their feelings hurt when confronted about their views and beliefs. Imagine that!

I've been a bit surprised as to how strongly some folks feel about the false pics and my fantasy identity. I apologize. I never considered myself a journalist and in my -admittedly- odd world, I didn't think I was being unethical. I figured as long as I wasn't downloading anything artsy, copywrited or trying to make people believe I was seriously Scarlet Johansson, morally I was in the clear. I have attempted to protect my identity, true, but I have also tried to create an identity that makes clear who I am not. Every now and then I will get an e-mail that says something to the effect, "Because of your opinions on ________, everyone at work thinks I'm PollyPeoria and is giving me a hard time. I think PollyPeoria is an idiot and I wish you would post the fact that you- whoever you are, Dumbass- is not _____________." I am sympathetic to those falsely accused of being me. I mean Polly. So, occasionally I have posted a fantasy piece with the purpose of building up my alter identity and also makes it clear that Polly could simply not be George Bush, because George Bush would never mud wrestle. Well, maybe he would, but he would get his ass kicked.

Some folks keep things simple. Back and white. They are who they are and they would never dream of misrepresenting themselves on a blog. Nothing wrong with that, admirable even. I insulted a few of these people by not adhering to the same high standards of transparency. For that, alone, I apologize. Not for being transparent, but because I didn't mean to insult anyone. I simply believe(d?) that it was okay to employ falsehoods on something I never meant to have been taken too seriously.

The problem is that I did have quite a few serious posts that I did want taken seriously. I have blogged on some fairly weighty issues, and certainly didn't want my posts on abortion, gay marriage, or the war in Lebanon to be taken as jokes. I didn't think co-mingling the serious with the silly -meant to misrepresent my identity- as a problem. I thought the divisions between serious and silly were obvious. I have been informed that they weren't.

So Polly is pondering. Even know it all Polly can be wrong. Maybe. I guess. Sorta.

What Polly REALLY Looks Like...

You asked for it. You have no one to blame but yourselves.

Passion of the Pathetic

I admit it. I'm a Mel Gibson fan. Not huge or anything. In fact, I've never seen Braveheart or even Mad Max. I did see Passion of the Christ and was impressed that such a solid film was directed by a celeb who starred in all those cop action flicks. I don't think I've seen any of those either. As celebs go, I've always put Gibson in the Good Guy column. He comes off as a nice guy. He's been married to the same woman forever, and has something like a gazillion kids. Plus, he is easy on the eyes. Although Mel's years of smoking have caught up with him. Well, his skin anyway. He's got that turkey neck thing going on. As usual, I digress.

Mel is sorry. Sorry, sorry, sorry so sorry for anti Semitic comments he made during his DUI arrest last weekend. He now wants Jewish leaders to meet with him to discuss what is required for Mel to "heal." That's all well and good, I guess, if he is sincere and not just trying to retrieve his career out of the crapper.

What gets me is that Gibson seems to regret his words more than his actions. That is, he is more bothered by his claim, "Jews start all the wars in the world" than he regrets getting behind the wheel of car drunker than a skunk, and driving 80 m.p.h. in a 45 m.p.h. zone. Yes, I know Gibson blames the "disease of alcoholism" and I don't doubt that he qualifies as an alcoholic. I just think Mel and the media should be as concerned that Gibson actually committed an act that could have easily gotten innocent people killed. Maybe if I wrote he committed an act that could have gotten innocent Jewish people killed, my point would be better made. I'm not Jewish, and I freely admit that if Mel had said something rude about women or my religion, I would be pissed- but not as pissed as I would be about the drunk driving.

Gibson's words were both hateful and shameful. However, more fuss is being made over his words (by both the media and Mel) than his CRIME. Like it or not, racist speech is constitutionally protected. This is America. You are free to be an ignorant ass if you want to. Driving in a manner that could have plunged a family off Highway One and into the Pacific Ocean deserves a little jail time. Mel is a repeat offender when it comes to driving drunk. I can buy alcoholism is a disease that is difficult to control. However, I don't buy that one has an addiction to driving while drunk. If Mel could string a bunch of anti Semitic remarks as well as drive a speeding car, I think he was capable of using a phone and a credit card and calling for a taxi.

I really hope Mel gets his meeting and healing with Jewish leaders... while behind bars.

Some Girls Have All the Fun...

This pic is for Scott J. Because I failed to check my blog mail in a timely manner, I missed out on a party at his place which included both beer and mud wrestling. Two of my favorite pastimes. This took place during a work/charity event last Spring. I got to wrestle my former supervisor and sink my boss in the dunk tank. Good day. It was supposed to be all fun and games, but I did my damndest to make her eat dirt. We raised A LOT of money that day. I highly recommend this gimmick for any other professional fundraisers out there.

Why Polly Can't be President

Okay, I know I'm heading into troubled water here, but I've had CNN on non stop for days now and I can think of little else than the Israel/Lebanon conflict. Seriously, I really need to turn off the tube, but Polly is painting her entire first floor this weekend and I need the company. At this point I can lip sink Headline News, and have come to the conclusion that we are a nation of freaks, who grow ever more freakier for the chance to see our obese selves on CNN. I'm never eating again. Celery and Diet Coke for life, I tell you.

Anyhoo, I digress. I began squarely on Israel's side. I did. Hezbollah should have never crossed the line and kidnapped the two Israeli soldiers. Stupid decision. But then Israel starts launching attacks left and right, killing innocent civilians and blowing up the infrastructure of a poor country that has been struggling to rebuild after its last civil war. Hezbollah exists within Lebanon, no doubt, but it is NOT Lebanon. The KKK is not America. Everyone involved and not involved agrees that Lebanon's infant government is impotent in ridding the country of Hezbollah. It also seems all are in agreement that Syria and Iran are to blame. Then why in the hell is Israel punishing innocent citizens and demanding the ultimate sacrifice for another's crimes? Don't bother whining to me about 9/11 and Afghanistan. Two victimized soldiers by Hezbollah is not equal to 3,000 murdered by the Taliban. Yes, I know that Hezbollah has caused Israeli fatalities in all of this, but not nearly as many, and only after Israel started firing at will. To me, it looks like Israel was just itching for a reason to bomb their neighbor.

It will end one of two ways. Diplomatically, with a prisoner exchange. Not likely. Or Israel will occupy Lebanon until it believes it has adequately bombed and disarmed Hezbollah (learn from our mistakes guys, not freaking likely) leaving Lebanon once again in tatters, and the rest of the Middle East itching to pay Israel and it best buddy, the U.S., a nice heaping dose of revenge. Oh! Along with two dead, but immensely precious Israeli soliders to boot.

What the hell does Connie Rice mean when she stated, "There is no point and nothing to be gained by a "premature cease fire?" Well, Con, how about the prevention of the extermination of innocent lives? Something you would think Israel -and the educated world- would well understand, let alone practice.

As troops amass to storm into Lebanon, I can only predict that it won't be much longer before the United States puts its big, fat mouth/thumb into this mess resulting making the whole thing worse. To that end, I say we give the country that yells "Uncle" first the entire state of Nevada. Or Nebraska. We don't need it. Surely we can find another place to dump our nation's nuclear waste or house our cattle. I know Nevada and Nebraska aren't the holy real estate that Israel or Lebanon are, but something's gotta give, and I don't see this ages old conflict ending unless someone moves. I know, I know, and I agree - they all deserve a homeland. So, lets give them a chunk of ours. "We" stole from the Indians, now's a chance to make amends by giving stolen property to a deserving war weary people. Israeli and Lebanese both qualify.

Any takers?

But What TYPE of Gay?

Awhile back I watched an Oprah Winfrey show which featured Melissa Etheridge and Dolly Parton as guests. Melissa Etheridge asked Dolly Parton whether or not she believed homosexuals should be allowed to marry. Dolly Parton replied, "Hell, Yes! Equal rights! Why shouldn't you all have to suffer like the rest of us?"

The silly season is upon us, otherwise known as elections. Gay marriage seems to once again to reign as the supreme issue de jour. Petitions have been signed. Voters will be asked to define, constitutionally, what exactly constitutes a marriage. Courts are weighing in on the matter en masse.

To be honest, I am not completely comfortable with gay marriage. However, I can't honestly think of a logical reason to justify preventing it. It is traditional to allow only one man and one woman to marry. So what? The most heinous of society's ills were traditional at one point or another. Slavery, for instance. At one point in this country it was traditional to burn women at the stake if society thought they were witches. Frankly, a lot of traditions annoy the hell out of me. My significant other's family has a "tradition" of letting the women slave away in the kitchen on huge meals during holidays while the menfolk watch football. After the men gorge themselves, they return to worship the television while the women wash the dishes. Sucky tradition. I asked my significant other why his name was printed first on everything. From checks to address labels to junk mail, the guy's name always seems to come first. My significant other justified it by shrugging and saying, "It's tradition babe." Huh. I thought "ladies first" and alphabetical order were also traditional, but the tradition of sexism tends to take priority over both of the aforementioned. Tradition alone as a justification to ban gay marriage doesn't wash.

How about the breakdown of society? How do you figure? Allowing two consenting adults to marry is going to somehow going to threaten civilization? What, two men get married and suddenly people will want marriage to include three or more people or even pets? Not likely. Marriage represents a lifetime commitment to another person. Folks who are into three or more ways don't strike me as the committed type.

It isn't natural. It isn't? Who says? Anyone who has watched rabbits, deer or dogs have likely witnessed homosexuality in species other than humans. I have heard some argue that if homosexuality were, in fact, "natural" or alright with the All Mighty, homosexual intercourse would result in conception. Like there is a shortage of people? Our species is on the verge of extinction is it? If humans are threatened it is because there are too many of us depleting resources. Homosexuality has been with us since ancient times. Perhaps it is nature's or God's way of preventing over population. Don't misunderstand me. I think gays can make good parents. There are plenty of kids out there who have been neglected and abused by heterosexual parents.

With a divorce rate of over fifty percent, it would seem that heterosexuals are the biggest threat to the institution of marriage. It would seem that most heterosexuals have difficulty maintaining and staying committed to a member of the opposite sex.

The full truth is that there is a certain type of gay that I find revolting. It isn't homosexuality in and of itself. Two women or two men in a committed relationship don't threaten or disgust me. However, I have been to Castro Street in San Francisco, seen a gay parade or two in Chicago, and seen a television series or two which all seem to promote a lifestyle that is absolutely perverted.

Think of the "Jack" character on NBC's Will and Grace. Heterosexual or homosexual, if your sexual desires overshadow absolutely everything in your life, you've got problems. That is, if ALL you are is a sexual being, regardless of sexual preference, well, you would fall into my "icky" category as a person. Over sexual beings exist in both worlds. Think of the guy at the bar with his shirt unbuttoned to his navel, the sleaze who has wondering eyes and hands, desperately trying to score with anything female. Icky. I wouldn't want the Jack character or the barfly to be my children's teacher or coaching little league. I don't want to have to rent an apartment to them. They are not normal. I don't trust the judgment of either of them. I don't hate either of them, but I do think they have made sex into something unhealthy and some personality disorder, perversion, or at a minimum- a sexually transmitted disease, likely lies in each.

On the other hand, I have no problem with the "Will" character on Will and Grace. Will represented most of us, I think. He sought a partner to share his life, have children, and grow old with. Most of society shares the same goals. Nothing abnormal there. I'm not a prude, and I'm not saying that sex should be outlawed for those who are not married. I'm not sure I would define sexual intercourse as a "sacred act" even within a marriage. Puhleeze. Is there a married person out there that didn't pursue sex with her or his spouse as a cure for insomnia? Nonetheless, most of us more mature non-prudes, who have lived long enough to have a few regrets, can likely admit- there are few things less satisfying and ultimately more lonely than a one night stand.

It seems to me that the easiest way to try to stamp out the perverted type of homo AND hetero sexual is for society to embrace and promote marriage for both. Society has much to gain from mature adults in committed relationships. Society has much to fear from those who promote sex as just another bodily function, nothing more special than, say, blowing one's nose or going to the bathroom.

Hello

Polly is okay. Will be back when I can.

Lying Liars and the suckers who give em money

I received an e-mail today that included the following:

"BTW, does it annoy anyone else how many restaurants, mainly the chains (Appleby’s, Chili’s) don’t include their alcoholic drink prices on their menu? I find that terribly insulting. They seem to want to intimidate or embarrass you against asking. And when you do ask how much the top shelf margarita is, the wait person often doesn’t know (or acts like they don’t know) and have to go ask. All part of the strategy to get you to order overpriced drinks."

I don't eat at Applebee's or Chili's or chain restaurants much, so I don't know if this is true. Can anyone else comment on this?

I don't know why exactly I avoid chains. It isn't snobbery or a personal policy. I'm a big fan of Krispy Kreme. Hey! Bill Spears! Any word on when they are going to resume construction on their Peoria store!? I like Lester's too. But watching the donuts being made is neat and yes, fine entertainment.

This drink scheme, if it is real, wouldn't surprise me. I have found that most big chain restaurants tend to be less clean, with longer waits, huge portions of food that really amount to nothing more than a hulking plate of salt and lard. Not that Polly is above a good dose of lard and salt, but I go to Hardee's for that if I'm in the mood for it.

Another scheme I've been subjected to -and would really like to know if anyone else has experienced this- is telemarketers who solicit for charities by saying,

"Ms. Peoria? Hello. I'm Golly Goody from Widows and Orphans of Whale Hunters of Alabama. I want to thank you so much for your generous support of our organization in the past. I see that you gave $40.00 last year during our annual begathon. Can we can count on you for another $40.00 this year?"

Essentially Ms Goody is implying that I've been a good soul in the past, they love me. I've supported them before, so how can I slam the door on them now? Here's the thing. I have never ever given to any of these charities. I know, because I never, ever pledge money over the phone. EVER. These charities are trying to raise money with an out and out bald faced LIE, which makes me wonder if these aren't just boiler room scam artists.

LATELY, IT SEEMS EVERY CHARITY TELEMARKETER SEEMS TO THINK I'VE GIVEN MONEY TO THEM IN THE PAST. Polly is good. Polly is kind. Polly is neither that good, kind, or rich.

Any one else out there experience any of the above? I say we start cracking down!

Best. Eyecandy. Ever.

Like every intelligent being on the planet, I have serious concerns about the war in Iraq. Or, as, my president calls it, "The War on Terror." I would just really like some confirmation that the majority of Iraqi citizens want us there.

Have no doubt. I adore our troops and they have my undying appreciation and respect. This was just sent to me. Actually, I've received it three times today. Polly loves a man in uniform. Especially this one. (Look closely at the badges under the American flag.)