Matching Tracksuits

Fun in Fours

Results For "Month: December 2008"

Decorating

We got our Christmas tree last Friday, but with the party and accompanying chaos, we didn’t get it decorated until Monday. For L, the empty decorations box was the most interesting.

DSC_2714

She played for a little bit, posing as well: she’s taken to saying “Cheese” whenever the camera is aimed in her direction.

DSC_2716

Eventually, L was especially helpful. “L turn!” she cried every time K or I hung an ornament from the tree. At first, she herself needed some help.

DSC_2728

But in true L-independent fashion, she quickly declared she must do it “Sama! Sama!”

DSC_2736

That declaration that she must do it “Alone!” is both a blessing and a curse. It bodes well for her future, but it often results in rice spread for a square mile beneath her chair and yogurt smeared about everywhere. Then again, is it really a curse, your daughter learning to do things independently? Some cleaner and a paper towel takes care of it, so what’s the big deal? Besides, what are we going to do — discourage independence?

Happy To You!

“When you wake up,” I told L before her Sunday afternoon nap, “it will be time for ‘Happy to you!'” She’d been waiting all week, and she was too excited to fall asleep immediately, but eventually she drifted off.

When she awoke, it was her day.

First, lunch. In two years she’s gone from milk and mush to shrimp, an all-time favorite.

Papa held the Girl as Nana practiced with their new camera. “It was rated best in this level at this price by this place and that,” said Papa, proudly relating the story of how he got it for a song.

The guests arrived and L became the center of attention. She’s used to it, I guess: she demands it often enough, though fussing or simply asking.

“Mama, trzym,” she says. “Hold” in Polish, but L-ized. She’s not shy about asking for attention, though we we she’d ask for it like that more often.

DSC_2614

Candles out and it was time for gifts. L had a little helper, F: the son of Polish friends we met here. He wanted to help with the candles, but L and I had practiced. She knew what she was doing.

F began by helping L with her presents; by the end, he was unwrapping them for her. A year ago, that might have been problematic: the Girl was more interested in the paper and boxes than the presents. This year, she knows what’s inside is what counts. Hopefully, it’s a lesson she’ll apply universally.

The GIrl came away with quite a haul: Tinker Bell, a couple of games, a Madeline book, a Pooh phone. It was tempting to hide some of the toys and bring them out a little later, but for now they’re all out — literally.

DSC_2653

Of course, Nana got the sweetest present of all.

Happy to you, L. Two down, one hundred and two to go. Sto lat!

Celebration I

It’s clean-up time now, but the party was a success — and so was the extinguishing of the candles.

DSC_2618

More to come.

Party Preparation

Later today, L will celebrate her second birthday party. Her birthday is not until Tuesday, but one doesn’t have parties on Tuesdays. We’ve been practicing: thank you, happy birthday to you (which comes out “happy to you”), dziekuje, sto lat, blowing out candles, and so on.

Last night, K baked a cake, as I did some touch-up work on our new door.

DSC_2572

The cake, when finished, was quite a masterpiece:

DSC_2573

Today, we tried blowing up some balloons, but L was a bit wary:

DSC_2587

Right now, she’s asleep. “When you wake up,” I told her, “It’ll be time for ‘Happy to you!'”

I’m surprised she even managed to go to sleep.

Religious License

Here in South Carolina, the Department of Transportation began issuing religious-themed license plates. They have stained glass, a cross, and the words “I believe.”

I Believe' license plate back in S.C., 2 years after ruling | Religion | missoulian.com

One guess as to what happened:

A federal judge says South Carolina must stop marketing and making license plates that feature the image of a cross and the words “I Believe.”

A federal judge issued a temporary injunction during a court hearing Thursday after opponents said the plates violate the separation of church and state.

U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie said the case needs to be heard in court. In the meantime, the judge said the Department of Motor Vehicles cannot take any more orders for the plates.

Department spokeswoman Beth Parks said the agency stopped taking orders more than a month ago, after it collected the 400 needed to cover the cost of making the plates. She said they are in production, and none has shipped. (AP)

I’m sure there are many in the state who are appalled by this. Just another example of those damn goddless bastards trying to destroy religion in America. That’s what the Andre Bauer, the Lt. Governor, says:

For those who say this violates the Constitution by giving preference to Christianity, I think this lawsuit clearly discriminates against persons of faith,” Bauer said in a statement. “I expect the state attorney general to vigorously defend this, and it is time that people stand up for their beliefs. Enough is enough.” (Harold Online, cached at Google)

plate2Yet how could anyone argue that it doesn’t give preference Christianity? There are no other freaking choices! I’d have gone for a FSM plate myself, but I don’t think my wife would have appreciated it.

Nate, at Shots from the Battery, really hits on the important issue, though:

I really wish we could sue the fundegelical state lawmakers who are forcing us taxpayers to bear the burden of the litigation they knew they were inviting. It’s a waste of $$ that the state taxpayers cannot afford. (SFTB)

Every morning going to work, it seems like I hear about the state making more and more budget cuts because of the falling tax revenue. South Carolina is predicted to have a stunning 14% unemployment rate by the spring, and these nitwits are out trying to make a mindless religious point.

Bilingual Breakthrough

We’re getting ready to go to the zoo — just L and I, a newly forming bi-Sunday tradition. L is excited: she’s chattering on and on in her own way: 10% Polish, 20% English, 70% L-ese. (One of the problems with raising a bilingual baby is that you never know whether she’s trying a new Polish word, a new English word, or just making up something in her own language.)

In the midst of the babbling, L suddenly says, “Mamma, afant.”

“Afant? I don’t know what that is,” K responds, as always, in Polish.

“Afant!” declares L.

“Honey, I don’t know…” K begins, then L switches languages.

“Slonik!” translates L.

“Oh! ‘Elephant!'”

Marriage and Divorce

One of the blogs tumbling into my Blog Lines account on daily basis is the New York Times‘ “Freakonomics.” Justin Wolfers posted “Assessing Your Divorce Risk” and provided a link to Divorce 360. I was immediately intrigued, for how can one quantify something as personal and diverse as divorce?

This site provides people with information and support for all stages of divorce. I’m not thinking about a divorce — or even close to it — but I was fascinated with the idea of the “Marriage Calculator” widget. When I filled out the necessary fields, I learned the following:

People with similar backgrounds who are already divorced: 4%
People with similar backgrounds who will be divorced over the next five years: 7%

It sounds like the wife and I have little to no chance for divorce, according to this widget. However, it includes the caveat/explanation that “In general for the five-year divorce prediction rates, those with less than 3 percent are at lower risk, 3 – 7 percent are of average risk and more than 7 percent are at higher risk.”

So we’re at average risk for a divorce.

What would go into calculating this rate? As the page loaded and I clicked across to another tab, I gave it a little thought. Surely age at marriage will count. Length of time we’ve been married would also be important, I reasoned. But beyond that, I couldn’t think of anything that might really give any sort of indication regarding divorce.

Fiscal strains present in the marriage? Nah — thousands of marriages survived the Depression and few people in the States are suffering at a level anywhere near that.

What about how long we’d known each other before getting married? A spur-of-the-moment (relatively or literally speaking) decision might be at a higher risk than those who’d taken their time in getting to know each other. At the same time, how would you quantify that for such a survey?

image1

What they ask for, though, is simple: gender, education level, age when married, years married, and period of time when the respondent got married.

Wolfers points out how many just assume “the risk is zero,” and I’ll admit, I still feel that way, even after having taken the survey.

It makes me wonder about the legitimacy of the survey, though. Certainly there are indicators for a higher risk for divorce, but how can anyone determine an “average” risk?

Truth is, I can’t imagine a scenario that might put so many strains our my marriage that we might talk about divorcing: the death of a child can lead to divorce, I believe. Yet there have to be other factors, for not everyone who suffers the loss of a child divorces.

If two people are determined to stay together, to make a relationship work even in the face of a tragedy that tears some couples apart, then statistical analysis is useless. The risk for them is zero, because they’ve both said as much. If two people are determined to make a marriage work, and the success and happiness of their marriage is a major goal in their life and not just something that’s bumping along for the ride, with the mortgage and insurance payments, then it seems to me that all other numbers are useless.

Those other factors that lead me to believe that this is basically worthless. All it says is that you fit into this or that demographic stastic; that’s not the same as risk.

Stories from L

Part of learning to talk is learning to tell stories, to string together a group of sentences in a coherent, meaningful way. Yet we’re learning that there are many different levels of coherence and meaningfulness.

Take, for example, this story L told me yesterday: “i whee i boom i cry!” (She’s saying Polish “i” — and, pronounced “ee” — and not the English first person singular personal pronoun.) Facial expressions and hand gestures accompanied this lovely story, which I would translate thus: “I was sliding down the slide! I was having a great time when I fell down. It hurt, and I cried.”

When K came home a few days ago, L told her the following story: “i Bida i no no i time out!” Translation: “I was playing and decided to pick up Bida[, our cat,] which is a no-no. Dad sent me to time out.”

Stories with three episodes. We are in the midst of what Stephen Pinker joking referred to as the “All-hell-breaks-loose” stage of language learning.

Calling All Pakistanis – NYT

On Feb. 6, 2006, three Pakistanis died in Peshawar and Lahore during violent street protests against Danish cartoons that had satirized the Prophet Muhammad. More such mass protests followed weeks later. When Pakistanis and other Muslims are willing to take to the streets, even suffer death, to protest an insulting cartoon published in Denmark, is it fair to ask: Who in the Muslim world, who in Pakistan, is ready to take to the streets to protest the mass murders of real people, not cartoon characters, right next door in Mumbai?

NYT

GuidoWorld » The Last Christmas?

Just how bad is the current situation? How long will it last? Guido offers some stark analysis:

All previous down markets have lasted three eighths as long as the preceding up phase. This would mean the stock market will be going down till 2016 – 2017. Since stock markets usually rebound before the economy, one can assume the economy will remain weak and contract at least through 2016.

This all leads me to the title of this post. Is this the last Christmas of post WWII over consumption? Or is this a lost Christmas, and last year was the final hurrah? (GuidoWorld » The Last Christmas?)