Monday, November 3, 2008

(I'm a) fool for you, Baby.

On Saturday I broke up with the Internet.

Oh, I didn't come right out and say as much. You know how it is. I said that I wanted a break; I needed some space.

I never committed to monogamy. Exclusivity was never part of the deal. No way. I still have other interests--television, movies, books, face-to-face conversation. It's a big wonderful world, and I'm still a young woman.

Don't get me wrong. I'm still as much in love as ever I was. But lately, the Internet has grown more demanding--dare I say, needy, even. In the beginning, a quick tete-a-tete was enough for both of us. It was quick, it was dirty, and it was good. Everybody went home happy. But the Internet has been demanding entire afternoons, lately. Sometimes, it's the wee small hours of the morning before I can tear myself away. Maintaining this relationship is interfering with other things. Important things.

Like my work. I have to work. And because I'm doing something new, I have to focus on bringing my best to the work. Which means, naturally, devoting more time and energy to the work. And that's part of the problem: The Internet and I work in the same place.

Anyone will tell you--when you combine work and romance, you should expect problems. Because somewhere down the line, the relationship is going to hit a snag. At its best, it's going to be awkward. At its worst--and I've seen this happen--the rejected suitor sabotages the work. Or sometimes, as happened to me on Sunday, you run into one another in the hall or the parking garage or while checking your gmail on iGoogle, and there's just no denying it: the spark is still there. You allow your desires to get in the way of your better judgment.

I know, I should have known better. That's what happens when you allow yourself to be swept off your feet.

Breaking up is easy. It's the staying away that's hard.

image, Cinematical.


Anonymous said...

Hi Jane . . .

Napping is okay if you also find a little time for thinking. Your blog is great and leaves the impression that your grey matter is awake. But what is that Obama logo doing in the upper corner?

Let's talk about 'time' for a moment. The world is a complicated place. When our Constitution and Declaration of Independence and Bill of Writes were written it was not quite so complicated. People had 'time' to think about problems and how to react. Today events occur so fast by comparison. The tried and true discussion, debate, and action sequence just doesn't apply. Particularly as it might stall our responce to a deadly threat.

So the President (Bush) has empowered himself with the ability to declare and wage war. Personally, I resent and oppose this power transfer from Congress to the President. In the case of a direct attack against America I would approve. In the case of the attack on other countries I think there is enough 'time' to let the Congress decide the response.

Now, Mr. Obama is apparently going to bring a new administration to our national government. I believe he will or would appease any threat to any of our allies. I believe the very liberal Democratic Congress will or would back him.

Unfortunately, they are all wrong and America is going to pay a steep price for their error. You just can't nap through this stuff.

Mr. Obama is an ultra liberal Democratic politician. He really believes that our government can replace the 'free market' as a control of our economy, that the government can administer more and better health care for more Americans and increase taxes to pay for it, and so forth.

Mr. Obama, behind the rhetoric, does not believe the American in individual initiative and hard work. He believes in assessing tax penalties on those who succeed, deducting the cost of redistribution, and giving what is left to people that do not earn it. This is socialism at it's worst and it won't work.

Barack Obama is a very intelligent young man and an outstanding public speaker. He has put together an excellent campaign for the office. The problem is that his ultra liberalism will or would create more problems than it solves.

It is very true that the Republicans under Mr. Bush have botched our American government terribly. It will be decades before the damage can be repaired. By simply 'not using the veto' of his office, Mr.
Bush guaranteed the excesses of the radical liberals that controlled the Congress.

That is no reason to elect more radical liberals. McCain and Palin are not related to Mr. Bush and do not agree with the way he administered the Presidential office.

I don't see it as a strong ticket, but a vote for Mr. Obama would do a lot more damage in the long run.

Okay. You may return to your nap and I will step off my soap box.

Mundane Jane said...

Dear Lindixwebb:

You say "ultra liberal" like it's a bad thing.:)

I respect your right to take an opposing stance, and even agree with you that the world is a very complicated place. Indeed, I believe it to be so complicated that there are no easy solutions, no black and white answers.

You raise many thoughtful concerns in your comment, and I thank you for them. And although I might engage in discussion and debate on these matters with you in another forum, I won't do so here.

I will go so far as to say that I do think Senator Obama believes in initiative and hard work. I don't believe he would be foremost in this discussion, otherwise. But beyond that, I also think he recognizes that our country is filled with folks who work hard, and that lots of them wouldn't qualify as successes by the traditional standard.

As one of those ultra liberals, I am hopeful for the future of our nation for the first time in a long time. This new-found hope did not come to me in a dream. When I decided to pledge my support to the Obama campaign, I was wide awake.

Humor Blog Directory Blog Flux Directory

Craft Blogs - Blog Catalog Blog Directory Logo BUST's Girl Wide Web