Teabaggery in Philly

Awesome pictures of teabaggery at the all-white Philadelphia Love Park celebration. 200 people teabagging? The photographer evidently edited out the sex, though, so these are safe for work unless you have a low tolerance for tacky.


Commentary By: Steven Reynolds

I was not a witness to any sex acts in the appropriately named Love Park, but phillybits was, and he’s put up an AWESOME picture of Brendan Skwire of Brendancalling teabagging a couple teabags. Oh, and Brendan himself has some pictures of the Love Park Republican kinkfest!

Phillybits also has a slide show that shows the all white teabagging group of around 200 people gathered in Love Park. One guy has on a camoflage jacket. Fashion faux pas, for sure. I mane, it should be illegal to wear camo int he city. Who’s he trying to hide from, anyway?

Wednesday, April 15th, 2009 by Steven Reynolds |

Liberal Blogger in White Wing Tips

Duncan Black, grand poobah of Atrios Eschaton, is featured in a fashion spread at Philadelphia’s City Paper this week. He’s stylin’, but the white wingtips are a bit over the top in my view. Still, Mr. Blackwell has not weighed in, perhaps because he’s dead. Let’s wait for the dorks on the wingnut side of the blogzome.


Commentary By: Steven Reynolds

I suppose that’s some kind of cool retro fashion thing. Philadelphia’s City Paper has a fashion spread as its cover story this week, and the Cover Guy is none other than Duncan Black, of Atrios Eschaton, Chief Moonbat, as it were. Here’s the description of his duds from the City Paper spread:

DUNCAN BLACK: Jacket, Steven Alan ($370) at Sugarcube (124 N. Third St.); vest ($150) and shirt ($89), Heritage Collection at Banana Republic (1401 Walnut St.); jeans, Levi’s 501s Super Skinny ($29.99) at Urban Outfitters (1627 Walnut St.); wingtips, Ben Sherman ($79.99) at Urban Outfitters; straw fedora, Christys’ London ($55) at Sugarcube.

Ah, but this is just a good-natured jab at Duncan. I know him fairly well from Drinking Liberally events here in the city, and certainly respect his work. Heck, I prize my Moonbat T-Shirt! But white wingtips? Man, will he ever live this down? And if he got to keep the shoes, will he actually wear them around town?

Enquiring minds and all that stuff. . .

Friday, April 10th, 2009 by Steven Reynolds |
Category: Blogging

Obama to Reach Out to Bloggers? Pick Me!

Barack Obama is going to meet with liberal bloggers? I hope so! My 11 week old son is teaching me to raise my hand, and I’m ready for the press conference. I’ll be like some aging Arnold Horshak or something! Still, seems a good communications/media strategy to me. . .


Commentary By: Steven Reynolds

Well, you could do worse, couldn’t you?

Here’s the article in Politico where they detail the Obama communications strategy, and there’s this choice little nugget in there.

The highest-profile moments in the new approach have been well-noted, such as the president giving an interview to progressive radio host Ed Schultz and Obama calling on a reporter from the liberal-leaning Huffington Post at his first news conference.

But those moves are only part of a much larger strategy aimed at communicating directly with audiences the White House believes are more sympathetic to the president’s agenda – and one in which much of the work is being done by Obama’s top advisers.

On the day Obama released his ambitious spending plan, the administration put White House budget director Peter Orszag on a conference call with liberal-leaning writers. Senior administration aides have followed up by promoting the budget to local radio talk shows during morning drive time.

Jared Bernstein, Vice President Joe Biden’s economic adviser and a favorite of the labor-liberal wing of the Democratic Party, also held a conference call with friendly reporters.

White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel has done conference calls with black and Hispanic media outlets.

Obama himself plans to meet soon with liberal bloggers, according to an administration official. With little fanfare, he’s already sat for interviews with Black Enterprise magazine, Telemundo and Los Angeles-based Hispanic radio host Eddie “Piolin” Sotelo.

jack I’m here to volunteer. Seriously, whenever our Jack raises his hand stretching or whatever he does at 11 weeks old, we say something like, “be patient Jack, you’ll be called on soon.” Now I’m imagining he’s just waiting to someday attend a Presidential Press conference. Or maybe he’s telling his Dad. . . “hold your hand high, Dad, and Barack Obama will call on you!

OK, you all know I’ve got to do an obligatory post with a picture of Jack once a week or so, right?

Tuesday, March 24th, 2009 by Steven Reynolds |

Next Faux Controversy, Give it 24 Hours, folks

The Obama family has a new swing set for the girls installed on the White House lawn. the right wingers are bound to complain about this, even though the Obama’s paid for it with their own money. They will whine about it being on hallowed ground, or that it does not comply to regulations right wingers founght in the 1st place.


Commentary By: Steven Reynolds

The Obama’s got a new swing set for Sasha and Malia and installed it on the White House lawn outside the Oval Office. From the picture in the MSNBC article, it does not appear to have the regulation soft landing zone that is required for public recreation installations. I’m guessing conservative bloggers and then FauxNews will be whining about this within 24 hours. Anyone want to hold their breath?

Thursday, March 5th, 2009 by Steven Reynolds |

WSJ (and FauxNews) Spins Negative About Record Numbers for Obama

The NBC/Wall Street Journal poll yesterday shows record support for Barack Obama, and that’s how NBC writes the story. The Wall Street Journal and its blog writers are seeking vigorously to find the dark clouds within those silver linings. As the market runs on confidence, we should blame poor performance on the WSJ’s negative bent.


Commentary By: Steven Reynolds

This is interesting. NBC and the Wall Street Journal commissioned a poll about the Obama Presidency. The numbers appear to show that Barack Obama is enjoying unprecedented support at a time when the Republican Party is seen as inept at solving economic problems. Well, that’s how the poll is reported at MSNBC. Here’s the first few paragraphs there:

Obama’s first six weeks as president, the American public’s attitudes about the two political parties couldn’t be more different, the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll finds.

Despite the country’s struggling economy and vocal opposition to some of his policies, President Obama’s favorability rating is at an all-time high. Two-thirds feel hopeful about his leadership and six in 10 approve of the job he’s doing in the White House.

“What is amazing here is how much political capital Obama has spent in the first six weeks,” said Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart, who conducted this survey with Republican pollster Bill McInturff. “And against that, he stands at the end of this six weeks with as much or more capital in the bank.”

By comparison, the Republican Party – which resisted Obama’s recently passed stimulus plan and has criticized the spending in his budget – finds its favorability at an all-time low. It also receives most of the blame for the current partisanship in Washington and trails the Democrats by nearly 30 percentage points on the question of which party could best lead the nation out of recession.

The poll was conducted by both Republican and Democratic pollsters and shows record numbers for Barack Obama. the American people show great confidence in him. That’s the lead as NBC writes it. But the Wall Street Journal sees things otherwise. They see the public manipulated by fear, perhaps, and they dig in the poll’s numbers to show the negatives, digging deeply. Here’s the WSJ lead paragraphs:

President Barack Obama enjoys widespread backing from a frightened American public for his ambitious, front-loaded agenda, a new poll indicates.

He is more popular than ever, Americans are hopeful about his leadership, and opposition Republicans are getting drubbed in public opinion, the new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll suggests.

But there are also early warning signs showing risks if his plans don’t show progress. The president’s support, while still deep, looks increasingly partisan as Republicans move away from him. Americans have more confidence in the president himself than in some of his initiatives, such as the economic stimulus package, and have some hesitation about his plans to raise taxes to expand health coverage.

The WSJ thinks the American people are scared, and that’s what motivates their love of Barack Obama. No, fear is what motivated George Bush’s big numbers justr after 9/11. Bush blew it with his disastrous policies concerning WMD and Iraq and huge deficits and an economy that crumbled at the end of his tenure. Sure, the Wall Street Journal almost always thought Bush farted roses, but when it comes to six weeks of Obama’s tenure, they think the American people are too frightened to think straight. This is partisan in the extreme, but not surprising for a very partisan paper like the WSJ.

The truth of the matter is that the Wall Street Journal is frightened. They are frightened of a plummeting stock market and they are frightened because of a tax increase on the horizon for the rich. They have forgotten the bubble the stock market rode through most of the Bush Presidency, a false sense of good feeling and high prices fueled by the greed of their real constituents, the bankers and the money managers.

The Wall Street Journal is scared, and even in a poll that is as optimistic as possible about President Obama, they project that fear. Of course, that fear is even more clearly reflected in WSJ blogs, like the WSJ blog written by Sara Murray, or the WSJ blog written by Susan Davis. Murray concedes the Obama popularity, but seeks desperately for bad news about the public’s confidence. Davis is just itching, just six weeks into the Obama Presidency, to start blaming the economic downturn on Obama. These guys are very predictable.

Let’s make sure to note that the NBC report on the poll also seeks dark clouds in the silver lining there, but they don’t lead with the dark cloouds as does the Wall Street Journal. They certainly don’t poise themselves eagerly to blame Barack Obama for bad news just six weeks into his Presidency, and I think the Wall Street Journal is forgetting a fundamental lesson about investing. The most important factor in the stock market is confidence. The Wall Street Journal’s reporting of these record numbers for Obama, their constant spin towards the negative, helps lead an investment community’s lack of confidence. Perhaps if we’re to blame anyone in the next few months for the downward spiral of the stock market and for a dismally performing economy, we should be blaming the Wall Street Journal and its partisan and negative spin.

Wednesday, March 4th, 2009 by Steven Reynolds |

It is Time to Leave Bristol Palin Alone

It has long bothered me the way we feel free to talk about Bristol Palin merely because of choices she made. As I now parent an adopted child whose birth mother made some difficult emotional decisions, not unlike those Bristol Palin made, my attitude towards Bristol have changed. Blast Sarah all you wish, but leave Bristol alone.


Commentary By: Steven Reynolds

The bottom line is that Bristol Palin is now a mother, a teen mother, and that will make it tough for her. It is time for Greta Van Susteren to leave Bristol Palin alone, it is time for Rebecca Traister of Salon Magazine to leave Bristol Palin alone, and it is time for bloggers to leave Bristol Palin alone. Go ahead and comment, if you please, on Sarah Palin and her new tax problems, but it is time for us all to let Bristol Palin make decisions about her life and that of her son.

There. I said it. I said it not as a political commentator but as a father of an adopted son whose birth mother also had to make some very difficult decisions about pregnancy, childbirth, and whether to keep the baby or make an adoption plan. I’m personally grateful that my son’s birth mother made that adoption plan, as he lights up my life even as I write this short piece. (That’s my pride and joy right there on the left.) I just can’t imagine the difficulty of making a decision about an unexpected pregnancy, and that’s what Bristol Palin’s was. It just isn’t in me anymore to judge her. What we should do instead is try to understand the very difficult decisions young women, women of all ages, for that matter, go through when they find themselves unprepared for a pregnancy.

Today’s issue of Philadelphia Weekly gives us some insight into just this matter. The article is written by Jennifer Merrill, and she describes herself as follows. From Philadelphia Weekly:

I’m 18 years old. I recently graduated high school in the top 10 percent of my class with a 97 percent GPA. I was Student Council co-president and co-editor of the school newspaper, as well as a member of the National Honor Society, Student Advisory Council, National Latin Honor Society, Quill and Scroll Honorary Society for High School Journalists and the yearbook staff. I was even on the homecoming court and was named “Friendliest” in the senior class Who’s Who. As a freshman at Temple University, I’m majoring in magazine journalism. I’m just your average teenager–well, except for one thing: I’m pregnant.

Jennifer Merrill’s article is the cover story this week in Philadelphia Weekly, and surely deserves the cover. It is very much a first-person account, even moving through a narrative form through much of the article as she leads the reader through the difficult moments she lived through since finding she was pregnant last August. We find what happens when she found out she was prenant, and how both her mother and boyfriend handled it. We also find that while Jennifer Merril is pro-choice, she could not make the decision of abortion concerning the baby in her own body. To me, that’s truly pro-choice, that she chose, and had the freedom to do so.

Jennifer ends her article leaving us in the air. She’s evidently not decided whether to make an adoption plan or to raise the baby and try at the same time to continue her schooling. To that end I would just like to say that both decisions can have joyous results, and that many open adoptions will mean she has contact with her baby throughout the baby’s life. I might talk about the joys adoption has brought to my wife and myself, and how we imagine that adoption has set Jack’s birth mother’s heart to rest. I might let her knwo that an adoptive family will likely be more ready materially to care for her baby than she will, though I would continue to stress that I can’t hope to understand the mother love she is developing as she carries the child to term. But mostly I would tell Jennifer Merrill that whatever decision she makes from here on out it should be the interest of the baby and herself that she should be focused on, and not the expectations of those outside her immediate situation. But, you know, I think Jennifer Merrill truly understands all that, and I think she’s a remarkable young woman. Here are the words with which she closes the article in Philadelphia Weekly:

Regardless of what I choose, I know I’m making the decision out of love. I feel confident in saying that no matter which option I go with, the baby will have a good life. She will be given opportunities. She will have parents she can look up to. Most important, she will be loved. This is the hardest decision I’ve ever had to make, and I can only hope that one day she will understand.

Yeah, Jennifer Merrill has her act together, and she’s going to make a fine decision in this very difficult time of life, and I’m happy she has the room to make that decision. That’s where we have all gone wrong when discussing Bristol Palin. We have not treated her as a woman, though very young, coming to grips with some of the most important and emotional decisions of her life. Oh, Rebecca Traister surely implies that those decisions are actually guided strongly by Sarah Palin herself, but even that I find to be distasteful to critique. Let’s leave Bristol Palin alone. Let’s let her choose how to live her life, and let’s also hope she has the support she needs for her choices.

Wednesday, February 18th, 2009 by Steven Reynolds |

“Journalist” Needs an Editor: Writes About Obama Fantasies

The New York Times hits a new low. Columnist Judith Warner writes about the fantasies she and her friends have involving the Obama family. Yes, that is journalism today. This isn’t about Obama working on our economy, sparring with Putin, or even about him christening a new Aircraft Carrier. She wrote about Obama fantasies.


Commentary By: Steven Reynolds

OK, some will claim that a blogger employed by the New York Times is still a blogger, not a journalist. I don’t agree. The woman is a professional writer published by the New York Times web site, and evidently has a contract to write one blog a week, but since Judith Warner’s called a blogger I guess it’s all OK that she writes about her fantasies of Barack Obama. OK, I don’t want to come off as a prude or something, but spare me!

OK, here’s the scenario. Judith Warner, the writer in question, had a friend. They both fantasized about Barack Obama. As Warner notes, “two anecdotes are just one short of a national trend,” so she emailed all her friends in search of a third anecdote. It all seems like a story out of Sex in the City or something, and thankfully Warner doesn’t give us the graphic details of her own fantasy, except for the shower scene. . .

I’m trying to wonder what in the world would make a manufactured trend about people fantasizing about Barack Obama a trend. Sure, the feminist movement taught us that “the personal is political,” but that says nothing about journalism, does it? And, sure, Judith Warner chronicles some fantasies that just aren’t sexual, like a woman wanting to invite Michelle Obama, Sasha and Malia over for tea and cookies. (No, none of that’s euphemistic.) So the fantasies here are not exactly sexual. Warner’s point is that people in general think of Barack and Michelle Obama as approachable, someone they could be friends with. Gosh, there’s a journalistic hook, eh?

Let me get one thing straight. From 2000 through 2008 we had a President selected because he was supposedly someone you could drink a beer with. It was good old boy leadership. I don’t want that anymore. George Bush brought with him too much incompetence, corruption and mismanagement, and we’re paying for it now. I want a man who knows more than I do, who can dissect complicated issues far better than I, who can be decisive and who people listen to. I don’t have any room there for a guy who shows up in my shower in my dreams. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, as they say. And I want serious journalism out of my New York Times!

Look, NYTimes editors, I can do you a flavor. I promise to write you three columns a week for the price Judith Warner is charging you for one column. I promise two of them will include my deepest fantasies. I’m thinking right now of the diaper elf who will sweep into my bedroom at 4:30 in the morning and change my son, feed and burp him, and return him sleeping whilst I continue sleeping. Hey, that’s a fantasy, isn’t it? There are a few million parents who have the same freaking fantasy, I GUARANTEE, so by Judith Warner’s logic that makes a story, right?

Good God, I’m thinking the New York Times needs to go under. That troubles me more than I can express. I’ve been reading newspapers daily for 41 years, ever since I started that newspaper route when I was 11. I have bought the Sunday Times every week for nearly thrity years, enthralled by the entertainment section, entrapped by the commentaries, and puzzled by the Sunday crossword. Even through the Judith Miller Fiasco I was not one to call for the dismantling of the New York Times. Hey, even great old gray ladies make mistakes. But I am sure saddened today, when the New York Times actually pays someone to chronicle her friends’ fantasies about rubbing elbows with the Obama family. Man! I just want to tear my eyeballs out or something.

Sunday, February 8th, 2009 by Steven Reynolds |

Sarah Palin Hates Those Nasty Bloggers!

Some fun quotes in the latest Esquire interview of Sarah Palin, one of which shows that she has a certain contempt for bloggers. Hey, aren’t bloggers citizens, too? And shouldn’t they point out facts like Sarah’s own husband being held in contempt by the Alaska legislature? Sounds fair to me. But Sarah Palin would rather whine about bloggers.


Commentary By: Steven Reynolds

That’s what she said to Esquire:

Bored, anonymous, pathetic bloggers who lie annoy me.

Hey, Sarah! Yoohoo! Bloggers are regular folk from Main Street, just like you. If they object to your imperious ways and ignorant speech patterns, then tough. You’re the one who entered the political arena, and if you abuse the system, well, having your husband Todd held in contempt may be the least of your worries.

That said, see you in 2012, Sarah!

Saturday, February 7th, 2009 by Steven Reynolds |

Prism Prison: In Search Of Rainbows?

They say absence makes the heart grow fonder. In stating as much, they omit the fact that the absent heart may be neither fond nor profound. Hence in many cases I suspect it is but momentarily vacant. Such is the explanation for my period of absentia from blogging.


Commentary By: Daniel DiRito

They say absence makes the heart grow fonder. In stating as much, they omit the fact that the absent heart may be neither fond nor profound. Hence in many cases I suspect it is but momentarily vacant. Such is the explanation for my period of absentia from blogging.

With that stated, my return to writing is an exercise in conflict. Specifically, in the aftermath of the November election, I’ve been in search of vision…the ability to see beyond my own malaise in order to capture the essence of the existential angst that envelopes my own psyche and leads me to conclude that all is not well in the evolving identity we define as the human condition.

In order to offer insightful observations on this or any other subject, I frequently travel the only path I’ve found fertile enough to germinate a glimmer of advancing awareness…isolation. You see, I’m convinced that the momentum of our fundamentally mundane and mechanical morass is the very means by which we find ourselves disconnected from that which can keep us traveling towards a more meaningful and noble destination…a more perfect humanity and the sustaining spirit that would invariably accompany it.

The election of Barack Obama, on its surface, incites hope, which is as it should be. On the other hand, the circumstances that led a majority of Americans to effect his election require a more thorough examination…one that respects, retains, and relies upon the missing elements alluded to above…that being both the curiosity and the cynicism necessary to move us forward while simultaneously forcing us to question the prudence of our precarious path…the one we’ve traveled to get here as well as the one we’re still walking.

Let me be clear. In stating my clearly cautionary pessimism, it should not be construed as an indictment of our newly elected president or his aspirations for our advancement, which he so artfully outlined during an inspirational campaign.

Notwithstanding, in light of our unprecedented economic uncertainty, I suspect we are a society and a world in the throes of an inevitable sea change…the kind that history so aptly tells us has the potential to signal the death knell of an antiquated “ism” or to embolden the emergence of one that has not yet been defined. At the same time, history also tells us that the gravity of these tipping point events is rarely identified at the time of arrival.

For the seeker…a moniker to which I aspire (redundant and ironic)…travails and time are intertwined in an effort to envision what exists around the bend while lacking tangible evidence. It’s the equivalent of reading a book and predicting the ending without having read the intervening chapters…a feat that defies logical construction yet one that is achieved and that is frequently recorded by historians as the astute observations of a visionary…all of which illuminates the unfortunate predicament of the seeker.

The seeker assumes the role of a prism…demonstrating a willingness to see what went before, endeavoring to receive it as real while hoping to tease essence out of its obviousness in order to emit something that is more than the sum of its observable parts…only to be defined as an instrument of distortion…despite the fact that the vision that the prism (the seeker) emits is wholly constructed from reality…though ordered in ways that defy convention and incite accusations of engaging in acts of incantation or pessimistic prognostications.

I’m reminded of one of my favorite expressions, “Everything’s shit…until it isn’t”. The prism realizes that the reverse is equally profound, “Nothing’s shit…until it is”. Those who are able to ascertain these moments of transformation are met with ire in the here and now…and then…at some point in the distant future…the still blind byproducts of humanity’s persistent progeny proclaim the prescience of the prism…and history’s equation remains intact.

Unfortunately, the seeker rarely has the satisfaction of witnessing the affirmation of his or her hypothesis. Death has long since consumed what remained of his or her human form. As such, all that is the tragic nature of the human condition is affirmed in a legacy of legitimacy never lived…though dutifully recorded years hence by virtual stone tablet statisticians in a surreal semiconductor society.

The heart stirs…though the circuitous circumlocution of the human condition remains elusive. A bend approaches…the seeker seeks.

Cross-posted at Thought Theater

Thursday, January 22nd, 2009 by Daniel DiRito |

Personal and Political: Please Meet Jack

Personal life changes surely have political impact. In my household we welcomed a son this week, a little bundle of (adopted) African American joy named Jack. We are white. In just the 48 hours Jack has been in our lives we’ve noticed changes to our racial attiudes, even as liberal and progressive as they already were.


Commentary By: Steven Reynolds

Below you will see a picture of my new son Jack. That photo was taken yesterday when he was ten days old. He came into our lives on Thursday, and while it will be a couple months until this adoption is finalized, we are proceeding with confidence, mostly because my wife and I have fallen in love with the little nipper. Hey, I’ve been writing for this blog for nearly five years, and one of my first reactions upon bringing Jack home was about how I was going to write about him. Our love for Jack is vitally personal, as one can imagine, and it frankly isn’t anyone’s business. But we are white and Jack is African American, and this year race is the elephant in the room who is getting noticed a whole bunch. So here goes.

Let’s just begin with a little background. We brought Jack home on Thursday at about 2:00 in the afternoon. He was nine days old. I will not discuss his birth mother except to say she produced a very healthy boy and she was unable to raise him. We are profoundly thankful for her decision, but beyond that, our feelings and thoughts for her are and will remain private.

Jack does not do tricks as yet, unless you consider squirming while having a diaper change, eating, burping and sleeping “tricks.” We participate in and watch each of these tricks with avid interest. Jack is our reality show. What’s become fascinating to me is that almost everything is filtering through the prism that is Jack now.

This morning while reading the paper I pointed my wife to a photo of Arizona Cardinals wide receiver Larry Fitzgerald and said, with a wink towards Jack, “now that’s a handsome black man.” Not “handsome man,” but “handsome black man.” My wife, ever the lawyer, countered immediately with a picture of Attorney General nominee Eric Holder. The point is not that we were on the alert to show our boy Jack examples of high-achieving black men, but we were distinguishing “black man” from “man,” and very consciously. Our views about race our changing, and it is not that our views were “wrong” before and are making a move towards “right,” but that those views are in control of a little guy named Jack. He has changed us, in less than 48 hours, in some very profound and political ways. My writing here will therefore change.

Of course, our lives will revolve around the boy. I am not teaching this semester because of a drop in enrollment, and I will be staying home with Jack for the next several months. I suppose this might mean that blog writing will not suffer in that time, but all indications so far are that Jack is the guy who guides every decision. For instance, we are very conscious that Jack came to us just a few days before one of the most historically significant moments for African Americans in our history, the inauguration of Barack Obama. There’s an opportunity for us to see Barack Obama, or at least the train he is riding on the way to Washington. You see, we live about a half block from a great view of the tracks Barack Obama’s train will be travelling. This morning’s household debate is whether we take Jack to view this historic moment from the distance of a few hundred yards and in some very bitter cold. Oh, if we didn’t have Jack we might or might not have made the trek down the street to take part in history in such a small way, but he’s ruling our lives now. Nobody is complaining about that, not a little bit.

A note on naming. I understand Barack Obama represents an historic first, not just that he is the first African American to be elected President, but that his name is so not typically American. Lots of families are going to be naming kids “Barack,” “Malia,” and “Sasha” in these months of political euphoria. We have chosen instead to honor our own relatives. Jack is named after my Dad, who is deceased. He carries both my family name and my wife’s. Oh, sure, being the Eagles fans we are, my wife and I considered a second middle name of “Dawkins” after our favorite player, but Jack probably won’t get that name added to his birth certificate unless the Philadelphia Eagles win the Super Bowl. The boy may be racially African American, but with my wife and I raising him, he’s going to be largely culturally “white,” whatever that is, and I don’t think we can help change that a whole heck of a lot in the long run, no matter how we try.

Heck, Jack already has shown his political tendencies. On his first diaper changing he made the usual “comment” newborn boys do. He missed my wife, who had the honor of changing him that time, aiming decidedly to the left. I was pleased our little leftist will fit into the family so well. While we will likely turn him into a book-reading nerd who enjoys reading the paper in bed on Saturday and Sunday mornings, we promise to instill in him a sense of African American culture, certainly. Still, with world travel and the Philadelphia Eagles and current events and politics and the role all of those have in our family structure, this boy is going to be an odd mix. Not apologizing, just sayin’.

To close, at least for now, I will likely be missing several sessions of Drinking Liberally here in Philly over the next months, but I’ll bring Jack down to show him off on a nice evening, and soon.

Saturday, January 17th, 2009 by Steven Reynolds |
Next Page »