Today was my mother’s birthday. I invited two of her neighbors over for cake and coffee. The two neighbors (one 92 and the other in her late 70s) chatted and laughed together while my mother sat silent. I tried to draw her into the conversation, but the truth is that she couldn’t really hear what the others were saying. My mom adamantly denies that her hearing and vision need major correction (and not just new eyeglasses). It’s really too bad because she keeps finding herself on the fringes of any group because she has no idea what anyone is talking about. A lifelong habit of “denial” is hard to break.
I hope that, as I get older and lose even more of my faculties, I will refuse to deny my failings. Well, I already have hearing aids that I use so that I can hear TV, movies, and whispered conversations. And I remember getting my first pair of bi-focals when I was in my forties. I just hope that when I start getting paranoid and not recognizing people I still have enough smarts left to be honest with myself ask for help — medicinal and otherwise.
I’m not sure that I have enough patience to see this caregiving responsibility to the very end. I have arranged for someone to keep my mom company once a week for a few hours so that I can get out into the larger world of friends and massage therapists and book stores.
I am finally feeling overwhelmed by the burden of being responsible for someone who is so dependent emotionally and psychologically.
I am feeling sorry for myself today. I wish I had my old life back.

I get emails from a guy named Charlie, who shares my views of the Bush administration. Charlie stumbled on one of my more vehement posts and figured he found a kindred spirit. He did.
Charlie tuned me in to


What is BuyBlue.org all about?
Mission Statement: BuyBlue.org supports businesses that share our progressive values and ideals. BuyBlue.org uses our power as consumers to vote with our wallets, supporting businesses that abide by sustainability, workers’ rights, environmental standards, and corporate transparency. At the same time, BuyBlue.org focuses sharply on businesses that violate the essential values of a sustainable, fair and profitable society through their policies and the politicians they support.
Why was BuyBlue.org started?
On the morning after the 2004 election, half of the country woke up in disbelief and disgust. Shortly afterwards it turned to anger and bitterness and many were entertaining moving to another country. It didn’t take long for all of us to collectively realize that we had lost our country to the other side and we wanted, no needed to do something about it. It was at that moment that the original idea for BuyBlue.org was born.
Values
1. We believe that most politicians no longer serve the public’s interest and instead pander to influential corporations and special interests.
2. We believe that America can be great and united again, but first we must embrace progressive ideals that work in the interests of all of our citizens, not simply those in the majority or those who are privileged.
3. We believe that the best way to encourage our political leaders and corporations to enforce progressive ideals is to vote for those ideals the only way those groups understand; with our collective buying power.
4. We believe that as a community we can, will, and must make a difference.
If you go to their site you’ll find a constantly updated list of businesses rated from “blue” to “red.” I was pleased to find out that Hess, where I buy gas, is a “blue.” So are Bed, Bath, and Beyond, Barnes & Noble, and — of all things — Fredericks of Hollywood. Hallmark Cards and Home Depot are as “red” as Wal-Mart, Molson Coors Brewing, and the McDonald’s Corporation.
BuyBlue.org is interested in identifying as many business as possible that are “blue.” You can send your suggestions to mail@buyblue.org
Spread the word.

Over at Stu Savory’s blog, the “auld Scot” is challenging us bloggers to follow his lead and post photos from throughout our lifetimes. So, below are sixty-four years of my face.
The top line is from the 40s and 50s, the middle from the 60s and 70s, and the bottom line from the 80s, 90s, and 00s. Next month, I’ll be sixty-five. I figure I’m overweight about a pound and a half for each 5 years I’ve been on this earth being photographed — not that this fact has any relevance to the photos below, but it will have relevance when I post my 65th birthday photo. Most of those pounds found their way to me during the past three years. Surviving caregiving requires lots of comfort foods.
OK, Stu. Heeerrre’s the Crone!

As my mom continues to slowly fade and fail, I have decisions to make that will affect both our lives. Move or not move somewhere else… Move in with her… Keep relying on sweet and helpfpul neighbors… Hire someone to come in to keep her company when I go out…
I don’t know what the right decisions are. On Monday, I take her to a geriatric doctor who, I hope, will make an assessment of her and her future on which I can base some decisions.
So, instead, I cook. Old fashioned chicken soup with lots of garlic. And this easy Black Bean soup, which even my mother likes:
1 cup salsa
2 cans black beans
1 cup chicken broth
1 tsp. lime juice
2 Tbl fresh cilantro
puree 1/2 and add back to regular then heat
I added some corn as well.
When all else fails, I eat.

I’ve spent the last five years feeling that I’m watching my life go by. That’s how long I’ve been caregiver for my mom.
The other day, I sat with her while we watched four hours of old family 8mm movies that are now on videotape — from my uncles going off to fight WWII to b!X first bath. As my mom — now understandably more interested in the past than the future — cried through the whole thing, I found myself drawn to the sensory details that the images in old movies stirred in my lazy brain….
…the itch of the wool hat that I hated wearing as a toddler….the feel and smell of my mother’s 1940s skunk coat as I buried my face in its softness….the smell of the clean starched pinafore that my mother dressed me in after my bath on pre-teen summer weekends….the stiff but silky faille of the burgundy dress I wore on my first date to a school dance (a fix-up with the son of one of my mother’s friends….the rib-crushing strapless long-line bra under by high school prom dress….the sun in my eyes and making me sweat under the graduation gown as I posed with my college diploma…
I’m always smiling in those early movie years, sitting at the birthday tables and around Christmas trees with the family that seems more like a tribe. Dozens of cousins, aunts and uncles by birth and by appointment. Everyone is always singing. The men are always toasting the camera and downing shot glasses full whiskey. The women look at the camera and wave and smile. We cousins get in line to get our Christmas one dollar bills from our grandfather. Pleasantville.
Then suddenly there are scenes that I don’t remember ever being in — the times I went home from college for family events. My grandparents 50th anniversary — there I am, still part of the tribe. But I don’t remember. My heart and mind were elsewhere. And I’m no longer smiling.
There is no tribe any more — those generations of aunts and uncles by birth and appointment. Only my mother is left, watching her life go by.

Draft #1
Old Lady Rap-Back
I see you
don’t see me
see you dismiss
the miss I used to be
my softness sagging now
my curves
gone to middle thick
I see your gaze
doesn’t stick
on my face
heavy with time’s lines
life’s lies
fate’s tricky licks
you think you got it
rough never enough?
you think that’s new?
my skin went tough
haulin’ my mother lode
up those Sisyphus hills
and as for fuckin’?
I was mouthing it
long before your sorry ass
first passed a gas
but I see you,
hear your fast talk
and I walk
from your easy lines
to make a choice of voice
that says more, more
than you
think
you
know
© Elaine Frankonis 2/05

I’d like to retire there and do nothing,
or nothing much, forever, in two bare rooms:
look through binoculars, read boring books,
old, long, long books, and write down useless notes,
talk to myself, and, foggy days,
watch the droplets slipping, heavy with light.
Elizabeth Bishop from “The End of March”

There’s hope on the horizon with Howard Dean at the helm of the Democratic National Committee. The first thing we have to do is stand up for what we believe in, Dean asserted in his acceptance speech.
And, at the recent DNC convention, Nancy Pelosi pretty much laid out the difference in what the Democrats and Republicans believe — as the following, taken from DailyKos— reports:
To see the difference between the Democrats and the Republicans, just look at the budget the President sent to Congress this week. Democrats believe that the budget should be a statement of our national values. But does the President’s budget keep faith with the values Americans hold dear? [delegates: NO!] You be the judge.
Is it a statement of our American value of fairness to give tax breaks to people making more than $500,000 a year while drastically cutting children’s health care? [delegates: NO!]
Is it a statement of our value of opportunity to give tax cuts to the wealthy few while underfunding Head Start, No Child Left Behind and student loans and grants? [delegates: NO!]
I didn’t think so.
Is it a statement of our commitment to security to give those tax cuts while severely cutting funding for the community police and local firefighters who are vital to our homeland security? [NO!]
I didn’t think so.
Is it a statement of our respect for those who serve in uniform to give tax cuts to the wealthy while restricting health care benefits for veterans? [NO!]
The President’s budget is not only financially reckless; it is morally irresponsible. Instead of being a statement of our values, it is a blueprint for financial disaster. When President Clinton was president, we had three years of surpluses. Those surpluses allowed us to save Social Security first. President Clinton, under his leadership, we repaid nearly $400 billion back into the Social Security Trust Fund. By contrast, President Bush’s reckless tax cuts for the wealthy have driven us deeply into debt, and his answer is to raid Social Security first.
Much discussion has been going on about how we strengthen Social Security; well, you can begin by paying back the money you took out of Social Security to give tax cuts.
Now, he wants to make matters even worse: he wants to privatize Social Security. The President knows that privatization isn’t popular, however, but instead of changing his plan, he just changed the name: now, he’s calling it personal accounts. He can soften the language, but that doesn’t soften the blow to seniors, the disabled, widows and orphans. Democrats recognize that Social Security does face a challenge. We are prepared to meet that challenge with ideas that are entrepreneurial, innovative, and will indeed strengthen Social Security. But we will not let President Bush turn this proud legacy of the New Deal into a raw deal for millions of Americans. Democrats insist that any changes to Social Security must not add to the deficit, must be fair, and must not slash benefits.
So, the big picture begins to glimmer with hope.
Not so much for the little picture, however, as I sit around trying to get rid of a bout of bronchitis and sinus infection while my mother goes through bouts of panic, paranoia, and plaintiveness.
I’ve got a massage appointment for next week — a little help for the little picture.
Meanwhile, a better big picture, for me, depends on Dean and the Democrats.

Even though I have a million things to take care of now that my mom is back across the hall from me and our lives continue to deteriorate, I just have to share some stuff about the Social Security debate that I unearthed in response to comments from Tim here.
The following are exerpts, and it’s worth reading the entire acticles:
From the Chicago Tribune:
Q: So how would Bush’s plan be different from traditional Social Security?
A: Bush’s plan, like Social Security as it originally was envisioned, seeks to maintain an income floor but at the same time give workers choices that might generate wealth. In 2011, when the plan would take full effect, workers who were born after 1949 would have the option of annually investing as much as 4 percent of their wages, to a maximum of $1,000, in an individual account. The other 8 percent of their wages would be invested in the current system. Workers 55 and older would remain in the current system. (Under the gradual phase-in, workers born between 1950 and 1965 can participate in 2009, and those born before 1979 can participate in 2010.) Over time, the amount that could be invested in the accounts would grow slowly, by a little more than $100 a year.
Q: Can I use the money for any kind of investments?
A: No. Under the plan, you would choose from a small number of diversified funds, all relatively conservative. They would be administered by the government and modeled after the Thrift Savings Plan now available to federal workers. The standard option would be a “life cycle” fund, which reduces the percentage invested in stocks as you get closer to retirement.
Q: What happens when I retire?
A: Upon retirement, workers would be required to trade in their investment portfolios for an annuity so that a combination of traditional benefits and their annuity payments would meet the poverty level, which was about $11,400 for a couple older than 65 in 2004. But if that income stream is higher, under Bush’s proposal, retirees could use the additional money in their accounts as they wished, such as continuing to invest, increasing the size of the annuity payment or taking a lump-sum payment.
Q: What if you decide that you don’t like individual accounts after you started investing?
A: You can choose to redirect the money to Treasury bonds, which are the investment vehicle of the traditional Social Security system. They currently earn about 3 percent a year. A worker opting for individual accounts gains if he makes more than that 3 percent rate and loses if he falls below that level.
Q: Would Bush’s plan give me more in benefits than the current system?
A: That’s unclear. It would depend on whether the performance of the investments over time exceeds the benefit reductions necessary to bring the traditional system into balance. Under a variety of scenarios, the benefit cuts could be dramatic, but administration officials also say that the current level of benefits is unsustainable in any case. Workers can choose to stay in the traditional system, but the White House has said those benefits will be reduced by an unknown amount.
Q: What if the stock market swoons and my total benefit is below the poverty level?
A: The administration has not addressed that scenario. Under some proposals, there can be a poverty benefit. But at the same time, officials do not want to reward bad investment choices.
Q: Wouldn’t creating individual accounts require more government debt?
A: Yes. If the accounts are funded out of existing payroll taxes, as the president proposed, then creating the accounts would require Social Security to tap the trust funds even sooner. That is because the system would need to keep paying current beneficiaries while also funding nascent accounts for people who probably will not retire for decades. The borrowing costs of Bush’s plan would be more than $1 trillion in the first 10 years of a fully phased plan, and then $3.5 trillion in the next 10 years. The White House believes the costs will even out over the next 75 years–that any debt incurred will be balanced by gains later–but in the short term the country’s debt burden would rise. The costs would really begin to soar about the time Social Security is projected to begin withdrawing money from the trust funds.
Q: Are there other ways to deal with a financing gap in Social Security?
A: In the past, payroll taxes have been increased and benefits have been reduced (such as raising the retirement age). Bush has ruled out any increase in taxes. Participants in an individual-account program would be required to accept some benefit cuts to help reduce the transition costs, but the administration has not revealed the size or scope of those cuts. Administration officials acknowledge that individual accounts themselves would not solve the long-term financing gap in Social Security, so other, still-unannounced steps would be needed…
And, I suspect, that’s only a hint of the landmines that will be buried and waiting if Bush’s plan succeeds.
From CNN:
For two decades, the Social Security system has been creating a “surplus,” and that reserve is widely thought to be available to make up for shortfalls projected to begin in 2018, when more money has been promised to beneficiaries than will be taken in through payroll taxes.
But that surplus isn’t a pile of cash waiting to be used. In fact, the money — $1.5 trillion plus interest to date — has already been spent.
In accordance with the law, the extra money Social Security takes in is loaned to the U.S. Treasury, in exchange for which it receives special-issue Treasury bonds. The actual cash goes into the government’s general revenue pool.
The bonds are special because, unlike other government bonds, they can’t be bought or sold on the open market, and they can be redeemed at any time at face value.
But just like other government bonds, the special-issue Treasurys pay interest and are backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government, which has never defaulted on its debt.
When Social Security looks to tap those special securities, starting in 2018, the government will have to come up with a way to pay the money….
SO, AGAIN, IT’S NOT THE WAY SOCIAL SECURITY IS SET UP. IT’S THE WAY CERTAIN ADMINISTRATIONS SHORT-SIGHTEDLY MISDIRECTED THE SUPLUS FUNDS MEANT TO SUPPORT IT THROUGH THE BOOMERS’ RETIREMENTS.
[And now, back to dealing with immediate crises. Stay tuned for a report on how Alice Walker’s new novel is keeping my spirit fueled — despite the Publishers Weekly review.]

just got home after a week and a half at daughter’s (to help her after surgery) and then grandson got very ill with high fever (waiting now to hear what today’s blood tests show) and I had to stay longer than I planned and my mother wasn’t happy staying where she was staying while I was away, so I leave daughter and sick grandson and go and get her and bring her home where the Crone is welcomed home by over a THOUSAND emails, 183 noted as Spam by Norton, 15 automatically deleted by my Message Rules, and, I’m sure, another 750 sitting in my inbox that are Spam and that I’m going to have to deal with — after making my mom supper and the having a shot or two of Absolute.
bleh!