The Battle for My Shredder's Soul

Recently, my beloved privacy bodyguard, a crosscut medium-duty shredder from Staples, died. The product was still in purgatory (or maybe on life support) until last rites were finally performed when the customer services representative at Staples said that the product was no longer under warranty (1.8 year old product, 1 year warranty) and it would not be worth it to fix the poor thing. I asked, dutifully, if Staples recycled their short-lived shredders and the representative replied curtly, "No." I hung up but continued to battle for my shredder's soul in an email to Staples. Their reply:

"I appreciate the time you have taken to contact Staples, Michelle. I am sorry to hear your Staples Shredder is not working properly. Staples shredders are backed with a 1 year full warranty and a 10 year cutter warranty, which is the similar or longer than most competitors warranties, so I assure they are not made to be a throw away product. Unfortunately Staples does not currently offer a recycling program for shredders specifically. However it may be able to be recycled under the technology recycling program."

Of course, Staples' technology recycling program does not cover shredders (which I guess are not technological enough to qualify). Additionally, they charge you ten dollars to voluntarily get rid of their waste, which I find outrageous. Never mind that I spent a $100 on a shredder that lasted less than two years (with shockingly moderate use I might add) but now I have to throw my unfortunate office product onto the heap, where it will still be in a 1000 years. Why, Staples, why?

Why the Iraq War Still Matters

All the talk about Iraq these days, what little of it there is, briefly alights on the fantasy of the surge and departs as if Iraq is a one-dimensional issue, like abortion or gay marriage, that can be addressed through a simple declarative statement. Before the surge, most Americans no longer supported the Iraq War and thought history would judge it a mistake. Now despite its ongoing costs and continuing bloodshed, albeit decreased from a year ago, Americans seems to view Iraq favorably, or more likely, not at all.

First off, let's not forget about, as Sarah Palin might say, "the" death. There has been a lot of it, surge or no surge, to little or no effect. They think that about a million Iraqis, including the 500,000 that died in the Iran/Iraq war, died under Hussein's 2- year rule.  But there are estimates that put the Iraqi death toll for our war at 1,220,580.  The American military's death toll is 4,174 and we have had more than 8,000 serious injuries. The war has cost more than $650 billion and may cost two trillion more(it costs us $430 million now every day just being there). As to decreasing terrorism worldwide, there is something known as the Iraq effect which is basically an overall increase in not only attacks but in the number and strength of terrorist groups - it's only a matter of time before we suffer another attack here (remember there were 8 long years between the attacks on the WTC). All over the world we have lost our good will and our partners in resolving conflict; even in Iraq, they want their supposed liberators out, out, out. According to a recent Gallup poll in Iraq:

"71% of Iraqis said they think of the coalition forces in Iraq mostly as occupiers and just 17% said they think of them mostly as liberators."

There is no justification for not ending this war in a timely, and if possible, responsible, manner. Even if the surge reduced Iraq's violence, we are still over there, spending good money after bad and sending young Americans sometimes to an untimely death. What qualifies as victory in a situation that never should have been in the first place? How can we leave if all the political will in our country is focused on toxic mortgage securities? Why do Americans care more about a middle class tax cut then about a war we recklessly launched, incompetently waged, and interminably conduct?

John McCain wants to wage perpetual war for perpetual peace, but he is a warrior and war is all he knows. We need a man of peace, one who thinks before acting, one who considers changing conditions in the world when formulating policy positions, and one who is willing and able to restore honor to America. I just wonder if we will choose what we need when we are always so focused on what we want during the thirty seconds of advertising between scenes from Survivor.

We need to keep talking about Iraq during this election. Forgetting about a war does not make it disappear. Tell them we won't die or pay for George Bush's hubris anymore.

Ourselves, Our Daughters

I wrote this to swing voters in Missouri and Ohio on behalf of Planned Parenthood:

I have a 20-month old daughter and the outcome of this election is very important, on so many levels, not just for me but for her.  I worry that if our country elects another anti-choice candidate like George Bush, which McCain is, he will continue the relentless replacement of federal jurists with men like Samuel Alito and John J Roberts. The may overturn Roe v Wade, and possibly Connecticut v Griswold, and God forbid that my daughter is in a position in 15 or 20 years, while these jurists still control the courts, that she cannot obtain safe and legal reproductive health care.  I worry that my daughter will not have access to birth control, when the time comes (hopefully later than sooner!), because McCain and Palin will staff the FDA with fundamentalists who will block reproductive medicine, not based on science but on their wrong-headed beliefs.  And I worry that despite what I teach her at home, her classmates will have no idea how the reproductive system works or how to prevent themselves from derailing their lives in high school because McCain/Palin think that teaching about abstinence is the only kind of sex education that is acceptable.  So I worry, and I cross my fingers for an Obama presidency in 2008.  Not just for me, but for my daughter.

Bring Your Baby to Work Day

I just posted this comment on a Motherlode (new parenting blog on the Times) post about the two presidential candidates' positions on national family issues:

Clearly, most businesses do not believe that child care, flex work schedules, maternity leaves, and other similar programs that benefit mostly mothers are in their interest.  I wonder exactly how John McCain intends to convince businesses, especially small ones, that they should pay for these programs themselves when the benefits are no doubt remote and indirect?  Most companies see workers as fungible and discount the cost of turnover, so arguments like "give a woman maternity leave so that you don't have to pay for replacing a valuable employee" is unlikely to be effective.

Any benefits of the Family & Medical Leave Act are social and macro (unlike addressing the health insurance issue, which has a direct impact on any given company's bottom line) and therefore require government intervention. Especially in this economy, we cannot leave such a sensitive issue up to companies that will be tightening their belts and shedding employees anyway.   The critical aspect of expanding these programs is how to do so in a cost-effective manner that will not hurt corporate competitiveness in the global marketplace and will not cost the taxpayers more when we are already saddled with so much debt. 

As for the family values of the particular candidates, parading a special needs baby at crowded, brightly lit event after event is a pretty clear indication that Sarah Palin does not think women need assistance in balancing work/life (heck, have the baby on the plane if you have to!).  McCain never noticed his wife's prescription drug habit, though she was charged with the care of their very small children.  Ambition first, family last.

Who Says 'Shout Out' During a Debate?

I posted this comment to the blog entry "Palin Meets Test" on the New York Times:

She sounds like a hometown little league announcer - I fail to understand the media's love affair with her "style." Her constant use of colloquialisms and that terrible scripted Midwestern lilt is soooo irritating. I am beginning to think her hilarious but disastrous performance in the Couric interviews was a ploy. The McCain camp knows she has reasonable political debate skills - meaning she knows how to obfuscate and evade where she does not understand and like the question, speak forcefully if insubstantially, and spin stock phrases over and over again - and wanted the bar as low as possible to create undue enthusiasm for Palin post-debate. The media, as usual, just goes along. They probably feel bad for "mistreating" her after the Couric catastrophe (correct me if I'm wrong, but those were Palin's words that sunk her during that interview, right?). (Sigh). Nothing ever really changes. She embarrasses me as a woman and an American. It's like she thinks she's running for head cheerleader.