She wants to smell lilacs — the kind that grew all over her family’s farm in Poland when she was a girl. But we had snow showers here last week. The lilacs have been long gone.
She can’t remember to take her pills or if she ate lunch or that she’s supposed to set the table for dinner. She drinks instant coffee because she can’t remember how to work the coffee maker. She only listens to the radio or watches tv because she knows how to turn them on and off. She can’t remember how to use the audiotape or CD players.
But she remembers the scent of lilacs. She wants to smell lilacs.
So, we stop and the Health Hut and I buy some Lilac essential oil, fill up a spray bottle with water and pour in some of the oil. I spray the air, her clothes, her bed.
And so, I sit here smelling lilacs.
Actually, I prefer lavender.

Most women will spend 17 years caring for children and 18 years helping an elderly parent.
It

F is for fraud. Voting fraud. My in box has been indundated with calls to sign petitions to urge Congress to do an in-depth investigation into the inaccuracy of the vote counts in Ohio and Florida.
F is also for fear. Lots of us are afraid of the way this nation is being led away from the fundament tenets of a constitutional democracy.
F is also for farblondzhet — an expressive Yiddish word meaning all mixed up. Because that’s what the Democratic Party is these days.
In response to a couple of feature pieces in the Portland Mercury, b!X pretty much lays it out there for us “Blues,” saying that the second piece, by Sean Nelson…
…argues for a loud and vocal reclamation of what it means to be liberal, which, he says, literally means “free from bigotry… favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.” He rattles of a string of (yes) values which are common amongst residents of our urban archipelago, including education and true literacy, science, reason, history, and the social contract (and the taxes it requires).
[snip]
…….. To move forward, the Democratic Party above and before all else, must reassert its claim upon the values represented by this urban archipelago — which first requires that it stop pretending that these values are somehow things to be ashamed of, or only spoken of in private amongst other Democrats.
They are also both entirely correct that the America described by these urban values indeed simply is a better America than the one desired by the base of the Republican Party out there in its vast Red Sea. It is, in fact, simply a more American America.
Yes, there is a not insignificant portion of the country that for some reasons insists upon and persists in pretending to be stuck somewhere in the middle, between these two value systems, and they repeatedly demand attention, routinely compel the parties and their candidates to cater and pander to them.
But just as the Democratic Party needs to stop trying to reach out to the hardest of the hardcore Reds who will never share the small-d democratic values of the urban archipelago, it should also resist the temptation to reward those who, at this point, seem willfully and selfishly to pretend to be in conflict when it comes to these two competing value systems. It’s time for the Democratic Party to stand firm as the party of tolerance, reason, and the social contract, and tell the whining middle to make up their minds which version of society they want America to resemble.
In our heart of hearts, we of the urban archipelago, those strongholds of the true Democratic Party, know what we believe, and know those values for which we stand. And we know they are quintessentially American values.
We also know the the rightest of the right-wing Reds will never agree, simply are beyond the reach of reason, and perhaps will only ever come around — if they do at all — when they see by our example that our way of life is a better one.
And we know that the whining middle needs to grow up and decide for themselves. No more pandering to their insistence that we reach out to them. They are supposed to be adults and citizens of a democratic republic. They’ve been given more than ample opportunity to see each version of America, and it’s time for them to pick a side.
So, maybe F is also for the “future.” Maybe we need to let the present administration stumble along for the next four years, fertilizing the political ground with its constant crap. And we liberals and Democrats need to take those four years to prove that we are better Americans — more truthful, more tolerant, more reasonable, and more invested in honoring our American social contract.
Just as I believe that, if we want other countries to desire democracy for their own people, we Americans must convince them to pursue that goal by example and not by force, so must I believe that the Democratic Party needs to set the example for how an ethical, moral, truthful American political system functions. We liberals need to show that our way of life is better than the constrained and strained movements of the Reds.
Of course, that doesn’t mean I’m not going to continue my dissenting tendencies when appropriate and necessary. After all, that’s also the true Blue American way.

In my local paper on Sunday, my favorite local columnist again wrote a perfect piece. This time it was in anticipation of Veteran’s Day. Diane Cameron wrote:
[snip]
We know that the holiday requires something of us, and that we should care. We know that when prompted by the calendar, we are to offer words of appreciation for what our soldiers have done.
It’s especially true this year as soldiers from our region leave for Iraq. We get to see up close what it’s like for men and women to leave their children, aging parents and other family members behind. But we often miss the greater sacrifice: Soldiers stand in harm’s way for us and they kill other people for us. They give up pieces of their psyche and their soul — for us.
I’ve thought about this the past few months as we’ve heard the accusations lobbed at John Kerry for tossing away his Vietnam War medals. He did, along with other vets, toss away some medals, but many people don’t know the total impact of that event.
The 1971 medal “turn-in” ceremony was part of a protest against the war in Vietnam. But it was also a protest against the way that veterans were being treated when they sought help for injuries sustained in that war.
The term “post-traumatic stress disorder” is common parlance now. What we forget is that this fancy name for “battle fatigue” wasn’t invented in the Vietnam War. That term and diagnosis came years later because of the activism of veterans like Kerry.
In the late ’60s and early ’70s, thousands of returning vets were turned away from VA hospitals because their mental health problems did not fit a category in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual — the “DSM” — the bible of the American Psychiatric Association. With no specific category, there could be no reimbursement or payment. That meant that vets were turned away or misdiagnosed.
What Kerry and others saw were thousands of vets committing suicide, dying of addiction or locked in mental hospitals and being numbed to zombie-like states by misprescribed anti-psychotic medications. Vietnam Veterans Against the War, which staged the 1971 medal “turn-in,” demanded that the U.S. government respond. With attention brought to the bureaucratic and political malfunction, the American Psychiatric Association was pressured to include “Vietnam syndrome” and, later, post-traumatic stress disorder in the DSM, which meant that vets could receive services. The psychiatric association had dropped an earlier diagnostic category, “war neurosis,” from the DSM in the early ’60s, out of fear that the demand for services could bankrupt the government.
Today, we are in danger of making a mistake again as we try to deal with the current war’s veterans. Some have said that Iraq is “like Vietnam,” when, in fact, this war’s veterans face different psychological injuries and will need still different treatments.
A pattern is clear. When considering the kind of psychic damage soldiers sustain, our government and medical systems first deny it, then exaggerate it, finally accept it, but then forget.
The rest of us forget, too. We forget how bad war is. We forget the lasting cost to those who go to fight and kill, and then come home broken. We forget that this war’s casualty list will be doubled or tripled by psychological injuries.
So, what do we say to our soldiers for bearing all of that for us?
Oh, yes. Thank you.
And thank YOU, Diane, for explaining it all so much better than I ever could.

I wish that I could take credit for writing this, but I didn’t write it, so I can’t. I don’t know who wrote it, but I got it forwarded to me in an email. Feel free to do the same.
Dear President Bush,
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God’s Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can.
When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination… End of debate.
I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God’s Laws and how to follow them.
1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can’t I own Canadians?
2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?
3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness – Leviticus 15:19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord – Leviticus 1:9. The problem is, my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath.Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?
6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination – Leviticus 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this? Are there ‘degrees’ of abomination?
7. Leviticus 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?
8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Leviticus 19:27. How
should they die?
9. I know from Leviticus 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Leviticus 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Leviticus 24:10-16. Couldn’t we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Leviticus 20:14). I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am
confident you can help.
Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and unchanging. Plesae feel free to consult Atty Gen’l Ashcroft about any of these issues if you wish.
Your adoring fan,
Homer Simpsons

In case you didn’t catch it, here’s the Op Ed piece from the London Mirror:
GOD HELP AMERICA Nov 5 2004
THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN..
THEY say that in life you get what you deserve. Well, today America has deservedly got a lawless cowboy to lead them further into carnage and isolation and the unreserved contempt of most of the rest of the world.
This once-great country has pulled up its drawbridge for another four years and stuck a finger up to the billions of us forced to share the same air. And in doing so, it has shown itself to be a fearful, backward-looking and very small nation.
This should have been the day when Americans finally answered their critics by raising their eyes from their own sidewalks and looking outward towards the rest of humanity.
And for a few hours early yesterday, when the exit polls predicted a John Kerry victory, it seemed they had.
But then the horrible, inevitable truth hit home. They had somehow managed to re-elect the most devious, blinkered and reckless leader ever put before them. The Yellow Rogue of Texas.
A self-serving, dim-witted, draft-dodging, gung-ho little rich boy, whose idea of courage is to yell: “I feel good,” as he unleashes an awesome fury which slaughters 100,000 innocents for no other reason than greed and vanity.
A dangerous chameleon, his charming exterior provides cover for a power-crazed clique of Doctor Strangeloves whose goal is to increase America’s grip on the world’s economies and natural resources.
And in foolishly backing him, Americans have given the go-ahead for more unilateral pre-emptive strikes, more world instability and most probably another 9/11.
Why else do you think bin Laden was so happy to scare them to the polls, then made no attempt to scupper the outcome?
There’s only one headline in town today, folks: “It Was Osama Wot Won It.”
And soon he’ll expect pay-back. Well, he can’t allow Bush to have his folks whoopin’ and a-hollerin’ without his own getting a share of the fun, can he?
Heck, guys, I hope you’re feeling proud today.
To the tens of millions who voted for John Kerry, my commiserations.
To the overwhelming majority of you who didn’t, I simply ask: Have you learnt nothing? Do you despise your own image that much?
Do you care so little about the world beyond your shores? How could you do this to yourselves?
How appalling must one man’s record at home and abroad be for you to reject him?
Kerry wasn’t the best presidential candidate the Democrats have ever fielded (and he did deserve a kicking for that “reporting for doo-dee” moment), but at least he understood the complexity of the world outside America, and domestic disgraces like the 45 million of his fellow citizens without health cover.
He would have done something to make that country fairer and re-connected it with the wider world.
Instead America chose a man without morals or vision. An economic incompetent who inherited a $2billion surplus from Clinton, gave it in tax cuts to the rich and turned the US into the world’s largest debtor nation.
A man who sneers at the rights of other nations. Who has withdrawn from international treaties on the environment and chemical weapons.
A man who flattens sovereign states then hands the rebuilding contracts to his own billionaire party backers.
A man who promotes trade protectionism and backs an Israeli government which continually flouts UN resolutions.
America has chosen a menacingly immature buffoon who likened the pursuit of the 9/11 terrorists to a Wild West, Wanted Dead or Alive man-hunt and, during the Afghanistan war, kept a baseball scorecard in his drawer, notching up hits when news came through of enemy deaths.
A RADICAL Christian fanatic who decided the world was made up of the forces of good and evil, who invented a war on terror, and thus as author of it, believed he had the right to set the rules of engagement.
Which translates to telling his troops to do what the hell they want to the bad guys. As he has at Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and countless towns across Iraq.
You have to feel sorry for the millions of Yanks in the big cities like New York, Washington, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco who voted to kick him out.
These are the sophisticated side of the electorate who recognise a gibbon when they see one.
As for the ones who put him in, across the Bible Belt and the South, us outsiders can only feel pity.
Were I a Kerry voter, though, I’d feel deep anger, not only at them returning Bush to power, but for allowing the outside world to lump us all into the same category of moronic muppets.
The self-righteous, gun-totin’, military lovin’, sister marryin’, abortion-hatin’, gay-loathin’, foreigner-despisin’, non-passport ownin’ red-necks, who believe God gave America the biggest dick in the world so it could urinate on the rest of us and make their land “free and strong”.
You probably won’t be surprised to learn of would-be Oklahoma Republican Senator Tom Coburn who, on Tuesday, promised to ban abortion and execute any doctors who carried them out.
He also told voters that lesbianism is so rampant in the state’s schools that girls were being sent to toilets on their own. Not that any principal could be found to back him up.
These are the people who hijack the word patriot and liken compassion to child-molesting. And they are unknowingly bin Laden’s chief recruiting officers.
Al-Qaeda’s existence is fuelled by the outpourings of America’s Christian right. Bush is its commander-in-chief. And he and bin Laden need each other to survive.
Both need to play Lex Luther to each others’ Superman with their own fanatical people. Maybe that’s why the mightiest military machine ever assembled has failed to catch the world’s most wanted man.
Or is the reason simply that America is incompetent? That behind the bluff they are frightened and clueless, which is why they’ve stayed with the devil they know.
VISITORS from another planet watching this election would surely not credit the amateurism.
The queues for hours to register a tick; the 17,000 lawyers needed to ensure there was no cheating; the $1.2bn wasted by parties trying to discredit the enemy; the allegations of fraud, intimidation and dirty tricks; the exit polls which were so wildly inaccurate; an Electoral College voting system that makes the Eurovision Song Contest look like a beacon of democracy and efficiency; and the delays and the legal wrangles in announcing the victor.
Yet America would have us believe theirs is the finest democracy in the world. Well, that fine democracy has got the man it deserved. George W Bush.
But is America safer today without Kerry in charge? A man who overnight would have given back to the UN some credibility and authority. Who would have worked out the best way to undo the Iraq mess without fear of losing face.
Instead, the questions facing America today are – how many more thousands of their sons will die as Iraq descends into a new Vietnam? And how many more Vietnams are on the horizon now they have given Bush the mandate to go after Iran, Syria, North Korea or Cuba…?
Today is a sad day for the world, but it’s even sadder for the millions of intelligent Americans embarrassed by a gung-ho leader and backed by a banal electorate, half of whom still believe Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11.
Yanks had the chance to show the world a better way this week, instead they made a thuggish cowboy ride off into the sunset bathed in glory.
And in doing so it brought Armageddon that little bit closer and re-christened their beloved nation The Home Of The Knave and the Land Of The Freak.
God Help America.
Save us from the Yellow Rogue of Texas! (Ya’ gotta love the liberal Brits.)

He didn’t get it before he was elected, but we Blues knew that. Now the Reds are going to have to start recognizing that he doesn’t get it as well. From msnbc.com:
WASHINGTON – As President Bush mulls what to do after winning re-election, voters say his first priority should be resolving the situation in Iraq, where the fighting is growing more intense.
They also want Bush to cut the deficit, which ballooned under his watch, rather than pushing for more tax cuts, according to an Associated Press poll taken right after the election.
The voters