bakingmom's Comments (88)

“Ummmm . . . restless leg syndrome is a real condition (my father-in-law's life and sleep quality has changed b/c of the medication he takes to control it). But I suppose that the flavor of the day is to stigmatize anyone with something the rest of us haven't heard of or lived through or experienced on our own?”

“I could not disagree more. I think existential angst is a bummer but it is not clinical depression. Clinical depression is a reflection that our bodies are chemical entities with fine-tuned balances in all organ systems. Cardiac rhythm can be affected by potassium. Thyroid function can be affected by iodine. Brain chemistry can be altered when the brain is bathed in stress hormones like adrenaline or cortisol. Brain chemistry can also change for reasons we don't even know yet. Thus, it is critical that funding for research and better imaging and blood studies be continued. This is a scientific issue, not a philosophical or psychological one.”

“It is hard to understand that depression is as much a chemical disorder as diabetes or thyroid disease. The psycho-babble is so last century.”

“Ditto. And thank you for saying it so well.”

“Not all women can (or should) take birth control pills so anti-depressant meds absolutely help those women (with classic PMDD -- pre-menstrual dysphoric disorder) tremendously.”

“This post perpetuates the stigma surrounding depression. Anti-depressants are sometimes over-prescribed but there are millions of people who have benefitted greatly from anti-depressants. Big Pharma, for all its ills, has changed lives. Not long ago people were institutionalized or separated from society b/c of depression.

There is no doubt that the cycle of substance abuse/domestic abuse/work absenteeism/family discord is altered when clinical depression is not in the picture. The difference between being human & clinical depression is the intensity, duration, & the degree of impairment. To have a bad day or a rough weekend or even a tough week is within the scope of normal human experience. But when that persistent sadness or irritability or agitation results in insomnia or hypersomnia or road rage or withdrawal from society, that is not normal.

It is true that some people can withstand that degree of discomfort but others cannot. So who are we to judge??? Congrats to those who have the stoic contenance to take all that life dishes out but not everyone is like that. Don't stigmatize those who struggle every day, just not in visible objective ways like blood pressure numbers or cholesterol counts (as Dr. Weil references). It IS a subjective experience so let people listen to their own internal sense. It is terribly paternalistic (in my opinion) to tell people that they are not able to discern for themselves whether or not what they are feeling is depression.

Okay. Stepping off soapbox now . . .”

“Strongly and strenuously disagree with you ~ individidual therapy is such an important and powerful dynamic. For anyone who has been traumatized, feeling safe (physically, emotionally, psychologically) is so critical to self-awareness and self-understanding. That sense of self is absolutely critical before revelations can be made within a group.

While rage is therapeutic for some, that is not true for all. One of the dangers of group therapy that comes with an agenda is the idea that all members of the group must connect the dots in the same way. There are some people whose grief IS manifest in sadness and pain. There are also people who experience re-traumatization when they are exposed to the rage & anger of others (because witnessing other's reactions is reminiscent of what the survivor also experienced). And there are people who are very vulnerable to "suggestion" so a group dynamic shapes their outcome b/c they seek to please others. To group all sexual abuse survivors in one big group disregards each person's individual experience.

While it is true that many therapists come to the field b/c of a personal story of understanding, that is not universally true at all. Most therapists are in the field b/c of empathy, understanding, and an ability to help hold and heal the pain. Curious to know why you discount this important arena of compassion???”

“PERFECT spot-on and hilarious! Fanning and fawning you jade!!!!”

“Michael,

Love all your work! Sicko really lit the spark of understanding for people to start critically evaluating healthcare. I cannot wait to see this film which sounds like it has already started a fire of its own. You absolutely know how to get people to think and to evaluate and to take action.

The best thing about your films is that they get our family talking! We don't always agree with the content portrayed and we don't always agree with each other. But you do ignite our discussions and our debates and, for that alone, I am so grateful.

The other thing we absolutely love about you is that you are an Eagle Scout. My three boys are also and, though we do not agree with all that the Boys Scouts stand for, we do hold you up as a role model of what the true meaning of the Scout Law and Oath stand for: community awareness, action, and service. Thank you for that piece of inspiration, too! You're the best, Michael!”

“I'm impressed that you are checking out FoxNews. You have a stronger stomach than I do. The idea of a third party candidacy is intriguing (if not downright sickening). I just do not want to hear her whiney, self-serving, goofiness . . . I want our country to move forward into better days and more up-lifting rhetoric/action.”

“Thank you for the comforting echo of Sarah-like predecessors who flamed and burned out. We can HOPE, can't we???”

“Early on, her sketchy academic history alarmed me. Something about multiple colleges (a new one every year) made her seem flighty. Then I heard her speak. OMG. Vacuous. Anti-intellectual. I struggle to describe her accurately. So, when I heard of the resignation, my initial response was to gloat and to say "I knew it! She is such an airhead!!!!!" (exclamation points intended). But, now, after some reflection, I feel sad that there are those who hold her up as a role model (still) and will purchase her ridiculous book and finance her on-going, vapid goofiness. She may have single-handedly set women back a decade or two (amongst those who generalize gender) b/c of her gushing non-sensical goofiness. Please please please boycott the book. Do not finance the insanity she spews and the ethics she lacks.”

“Thank you, Jennifer, for addressing this topic with your customary wit and insight. You know you are reading a talented writer when all you can do is nod your head in agreement and say, "thank you for your words; they say what I want to say, too."

As others have said, writing exposes so much. Alice H may regret having exposed as much as she did. And yet . . . isn't that exactly the power of words? Whether in print or by tweet, doesn't language move us to explore something we hadn't thought of before? Did Alice H unintentionally do with real-life twitter what she has always done with fictional stories in her books: force us to a new realization of how we lead our lives?

That said, I must say I loath the stream of consciousness that is twitter. Good writing, in my opinion, takes time. The impulsive tweets are quick utterances without foresight or proper context.”

“Puh-lease. I am so very disappointed that anyone would allow Sanford off the hook for "true love" -- this is not love which endures the test of real life: bills, mortgages, groceries, lawn care, picking up the kids, wiping the snot, washing the car. The mundane is real life and true love is sustained through that. True LUST, in contrast, is what this is: pleasure-filled, self-indulgent, fun, exciting, and totally narcissistic.

My father told me that love is putting the needs of the person you love ahead of your own. Love, by that definition, is selfless and, sometimes, self-sacrificing. Once Sanford entered fantasy-land, he defied the chance of true love with his mate, the mother of his children because he was selfishly seeking his own gratification instead of putting the needs of his wife and his children ahead of his own.

His words are not romantic at all. He is pathetic in the level of self-deceit and lack of conviction that he has displayed. (And for all the flamers on this post: my husband and I have been happily in love, and in lust, for 20 years . . .)”

“In a nation built of laws, the actions of the lawmakers reflects the integrity of public policy. Personal lives do matter. It is convenient to side-step the issue of infidelity and say that it does not matter. But when you lie to yourself and your spouse and your children (!), you are living a life of smoke and mirrors. That may be okay in Hollywood where acting is the way of life but it should not be acceptable among elected officials. We should not be afraid to say that we demand more of people who represent us. If we keep lowering the standard where honesty, truth, integrity, not e-mailing and travelling on company time, not ditching responsibility for a rendez-vous, not being able to keep a zipper zipped -- if that standard continues to be lowered, we have only ourselves to blame since we profess the belief that the government is OF and BY and FOR us.”

“My mother (married almost 50 years to the same man) told me that marriage is all about compromise: if you believe you are compromising (and sometimes sacrificing) 70 percent of the time, you have it almost right. I've found that advice to be true in marriage, work relationships, friendships, and family relationships (including with my afore-mentioned mom). So, I think the lesson for a successful marriage is that you give-give-give and then give some more. It is not for the faint of heart. But, going on 20 years with my first-only husband, I have to say each year gets better so the work of giving and compromising and negotiating pays off with a depth of understanding and mutual respect and great memories.”

“Arianna,

Rachel is my only "gotta watch" show and it will be such a treat to see you there tomorrow. You will be fabulous! Best wishes . . .

The topic that I believe was largely ignored during the campaign was education. It would be interesting to hear an in-depth analysis of one of the great debacles (in my opinion) of the Bush years: the no-child-left-behind concept (and the teaching to the test that it encouraged).

And, though it would be hugely politically incorrect, I'd also like to hear economists and educators talk about the division of public spending for special education vs. gifted education. What is the cost of mainstreaming? In an era when we have to make tough choices about public financing, are we prepared to make true sacrifices of extending every program to every pupil?

I am not an educator. I also consider myself a card-carrying liberal. But I do see excesses in public programs that need frank and honest discussion (as any family budget discussion engenders) about how we make choices when resources are scarce. I'd love to hear "pundits" weigh in and, as Rachel says, "talk me down" . . .”

“Mixed feelings: Pawlenty as POTUS would get him out of MN (yippee!) but Pawlenty as POTUS would mean he would be in DC (not so good for all of us)”

“As a Minnesotan, I have to say that despite the good sense of the people of this state who supported O, there was a segment (well-educated, literate, but scary-Bible-thumping-crazies) who looked past the most frightening rhetoric of the entire campaign and re-elected the truly scary Michele B. Not my district. Whew.

Climbing on my own soapbox: I think people follow Rush and Faux News and Pale-in when they are not taught analytical thinking skills. That is not geographic nor demographic to any certain group. It is more an indictment of crazy education crap like "no child left behind" that teaches to the test instead of reinforcing independent judgment and analysis. It is the result of a "folksy" President who made it okay to believe (for some) that intellectualism is somehow a bad thing. It is also the result of a culture that has said (and I desperately hope this is changing!) that things are more important than ideas. When all that is reinforced, voters drink kool-aid when it is served.

Progressives must stay vigilant and aware that we have to do a tireless job of reminding people about history and teaching people about the process of involvement and the commitment to change. Through forums, blogs, you tube, music videos ~ we have the power to reach those who have only been tuned into the channels on the far right.”

“I have loved every single thing MO has worn. From the yellow cardigan number to the election night dress (which I loved) and the gorgeous red dress for the White House intro. She exudes confidence and self-assurance and I (like many here) wish I could just hang out with her.

Yes. I am on a major sugar-high! This is a man who revolutionized campaigning and inclusion in the political process. He literally gave youth (including my kids) cause and reason and hope and completely ignited their passion and enthusiasm for the political process. And now this wonderful first lady gives my boys a fabulous role model (aside from their mom, of course! LOL!) of classy, smart, articulate, compassionate women! So I'm okay with the sugar-high ~ it has been quite a famine for a long time.

My fantasy? BO for 8 years; MO for 8 more; then Beau Biden after that. Now THAT would be a wonderful world for my kids!”

“Steven, you are absolutely my favorite writer. I LOVE this post b/c, once again, you articulate clearly and vividly what (I believe) is the core message of O and those of us who have followed the journey. Thank you.”

“I am in that bracket where I will pay more under Obama. But I do not begrudge it. I think Biden was unfairly maligned for saying that paying taxes is patriotic. I agree. I think of it this way: my taxes are a donation to my government. If I believe that my government is going to work for all citizens (not just the wealthiest), then I have to support that effort. It is the way that roads are repaired & bridges are built & schools are funded. If I drive those roads & cross those bridges, then I need to support those efforts. And because this country provided me the opportunity to make more than I need (and, honestly, how much do we each truly NEED?), I SHOULD provide greater financial support than those who live in the same country but did not, for WHATEVER reason, have the same opportunities.

That said, we are going to have to learn the meaning of the word "sacrifice" & "unselfishness". I think we have an incredible opportunity to be our best selves. I would rather my children live the principles of CARING & supporting each other over quibbling over dollars & cents . . . My children have lived through 9-11 and Katrina and from both national tragedies we know we are all in this together. I would like that philosophy to reign not only during times of national hardship but to become a national ethic. I think, with Obama at the helm,”

“Excellent post! Bust a gut about the "romper room" analogy -- hilarious! The Larry David reference was outstanding, too.

My biggest fear is that she will not go away. She is so incredibly narcissistic that she genuinely believes that she has a platform with a base and, as with beauty pageants, she can practice a refrain, wave, grin, wink and sashay to another title. UGH!!!”

“I am very left wing but I completely agree with you, RightWingMarine. Ms. Levine's story is tragic and absolutely heart-breaking but, unfortunately, there are always incidents of "rare" or "unexpected" tragic effects with treatments (through absolutely no real fault of the patient or the provider or the drug manufacturer, for that matter) that do not adversely affect the majority of people receiving those treatments.

If we had reliable crystal balls, everyone would be spared pain and suffering. Without a crystal ball, we do what we can to help those who need help. Our litigious society runs the risk of being "entitled" to mistake-free, risk-free treatment which really dampens the medical/pharmaceutical industry's involvement in research and extension of treatment.”

“Labels aside, I have been offended by Pale-in's candidacy precisely because it demonstrates a perverse sexism in that Pale-in was selected on the basis of gender alone. The unbelievable lack of credibility (from her turnstile college transcripts to her inability to demonstrate rudimentary knowledge including, but not limited to, the role of the VP) to the incurious, anti-intellectual stance Pale-in embraces is alarming. And, quite frankly, would never have been tolerated or left untouched were she a man.

To echo feo's comment: I do remember the days of Schlafly and it is for that reason alone that I am deeply offended by the hypocricy of Janey-come-latelys to the concept that women can make choices without suffering judgment. While Schlafly (and women like her, including Dr. Laura and Sarah Pale-in) talked up so-called family values, the actions demonstrated anything but a commitment to family. Those women sat/sit in judgment of others and it is hard to imagine supporting one of their ilk.

I find it invigorating and empowering to think that women can run for political offices such as
Senator, VP, and President. I just think it is insulting to women (and men) that superficial qualities (appearance, hairstyle, ridiculously over-priced wardrobes) trump reflection, studiousness, education, intellectualism, curiosity, ability to synthesize a broader world view . . .”