Money might be the root of all evil, or perhaps it’s lawyers, but I’d make an argument that procrastination is near the top of the list of bad things.  Generally fueled by fear and sloth, procrastination wreaks havoc on our psyche.  Practiced at an Olympic level, it can destroy relationships, stall careers, and become so entrenched as to render a once merely complicated situation irreversibly damaged.

Case in point: Guantanamo.

Opened January 2002 in response to 9/11, the camp (and when I say ‘camp’, I don’t mean s’mores) for global terrorism suspects, at its peak, held over 700 detainees. Over the years, many have been released, deemed innocent of the charges brought against them.  Oh wait – there were no charges brought against them.  Heck, one guy was a used car salesman, in the wrong place at the wrong time.  Several were juveniles.  Too many were swept up by Afghani and Pakistani authorities intent on collecting the $5000 bounty offered by the U.S. government for arrests.  Former Secretary of State Colin Powell’s top aide, Lawrence Wilkerson, made it clear that W, Cheney, and Rummy knew many of those incarcerated were innocent but thought it imprudent to do or say anything – in the name of our safety and their political reputations.

Enter President Obama.  Closing Guantanamo became a priority, one he hoped to accomplish by the end of his first year in office.  That didn’t happen.  Why?  The likes of Sean Hannity, the Fox News talking head, called the detainees ‘the worst of the worst’ and instilled FEAR among his vast, paranoid audience.  Congress, led by Mitch McConnell, jumped on board, declaring it a bad idea to have these ‘captured terrorists’ transferred to American backyards, or at least prisons in the backyards of American towns and cities.  The boogeymen in Cuba scared us too much to be dealt with and so, like most critical issues facing our government, the President and Congress decided to procrastinate.  Guantanamo could be dealt with another day.

Cut to four years later.  One hundred sixty-three detainees remain, many attempting to starve themselves to death.  The bad press the U.S. will get when prisoners actually start dying of hunger will only be added to the already atrocious reputation we began to develop after Abu Ghraib.  Gitmo, in its current state, is a bad idea that only gets worse the more we put off the difficult choices.  By not stopping long enough to figure out a solution, and comprehensively agreeing on what that solution is, we’ve created human beings down at the naval base in Cuba who hate us now even if they didn’t when they arrived. Some of them (most?) are very likely bad men who want to do bad things to America, but looking at the history of the place, there’s a good chance that several were benign, if not outright innocent, when they were arrested.  Who’s to know?  They’re enemy combatants.  They have no rights.

A lawyer friend (I have several) once told me that the foundation of this country’s justice system, and that of many enlightened nations – innocent until proven guilty – is to be upheld at all costs, ‘even if it means criminals sometimes go free’.  I have no idea who these men are at Guantanamo.  They look guilty of something because they look like the 9/11 hijackers, but I’d hardly present those feelings in a court of law.  The point is, we can’t continue to ignore them indefinitely, even if, as average Americans going about our day-to-day lives, we think we can.  It matters how the world views us.  It matters how we view ourselves.

The economy, immigration reform, sensible gun control, clean energy, Gitmo – Washington kicks the can down the road every day on each of these issues.  Policy based on fear, greed, hubris, and sheer laziness?  It’s procrastination.  The root of all evil?  I think so.

In case you’re interested:

High Court Hears Detainee Rights Case – NPR, Nina Totenberg

Classified Files Offer New Insight Into Detainees – NY Times, Charlie Savage, William Glaberson, and Andrew W. Lehren

By the Numbers: Ten Years at Guantanamo Bay – Thinkprogress.com, Eli Clifton

I’m beside myself about the gun vote yesterday.  Every time someone brings up the subject or I read another story about the reasons why 46 of our elective representatives in Congress failed to support sensible gun control legislation, my heart races.  It’s racing right now.  First, let me quickly clear something up in case you don’t know.

Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, historically a gun rights advocate, voted FOR the bans on assault weapons and large magazines, and initially voted FOR the expanded background check legislation.  He changed his vote to a NO in order to have the ability, as Majority Leader, to bring the measure up again (parliamentary procedures).  So don’t send him hate mail.

President Obama is as angry as anyone and quickly reminded us that the fight is not over.  And it isn’t.  One of the greatest reasons why the NRA/gun lobby is so effective is because they’re successful in getting their troops in line.  The NRA has roughly three million members, depending on whom you ask.  The population of the U.S. is over 300 million.  Yet when you hear about senators’ offices being flooded with phone calls, emails, and texts, it is not we who support the Manchin-Toomey amendment they’re talking about.  It’s the gun lobby.  Are we really so lazy that we’re okay sitting back and letting the parents of the Newtown victims do all the dirty work?  Have you called?  Have you emailed?  Emails are easy, and while several of my missives may have fallen on deaf ears, several did not.  Just Tuesday, I received a note from Montana’s Jon Tester explaining why he’s my friend:  “The Manchin-Toomey amendment is carefully crafted to make our communities safer while strengthening the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans.  Having read the amendment closely, I believe it strikes a careful balance, and I will support it.”  He made other points, all illustrating his commitment to educate his gun-loving constituents on the reasons why they would NOT be affected adversely by this sensible, meaningful bill.  How can North Dakota be so different?  Yet Democrat Heidi Heitkamp voted No.  Flood her offices with phone calls and emails.  What do you have to lose?!  Nothing.

At dinner with friends last Saturday night, we were discussing the issue of gun control.  My overarching take on the subject is, and has always been, clumsy but passionate.  In my heart I believe, simply, that less guns means less death – if not tomorrow than somewhere down the road.  And while I hate to compare apples with oranges, consider the smoking issue.  However we did it – turning smokers into modern-day pariahs – less cigarettes has resulted in less death.  I’m aware there’s no equivalent amendment in our constitution guaranteeing a person’s right to smoke (and everyone still has that right, just in fewer places) but, like MADD, we’ve adjusted our mindset and our expectations of each other.  In regard to gun legislation, Margaret Talbot in The New Yorker this week got it on the nose:

“It’s true, too, that a background check would not have stopped Adam Lanza, who had no criminal record, and whose mother had reportedly bought the guns he used in Newtown.  But laws influence culture, just as culture influences laws, and if Congress enacted a serious piece of gun-control legislation perhaps that might initiate a subtle shift in American attitudes toward guns, and that might eventually lead some parent with a deeply troubled, deeply isolated son fascinated by violence to think twice before turning the family home into a munitions depot.  Conversely, if lawmakers won’t pass even a modest reform supported by the vast majority of Americans, they will be capitulating to the N.R.A.’s corrosive view that the only answer to gun violence is more guns.”

In fact, that’s not the answer.  From Ezra Klein’s Six facts about guns, violence, and gun control (The Washington Post, July 2012):

“Last year, economist Richard Florida dove deep into the correlations between gun deaths and other kinds of social indicators. Some of what he found was, perhaps, unexpected: Higher populations, more stress, more immigrants, and more mental illness were not correlated with more deaths from gun violence. But one thing he found was, perhaps, perfectly predictable: States with tighter gun control laws appear to have fewer gun-related deaths.”

THIS IS NOT OVER.  Flood the Senate with your thoughts.  Just one email.  Just one text.  You’ll sleep better tonight.

(The following is an interview with an imaginary Republican congressman, Rick Offenbach, from Wisconsin.)

Daily Cup:

After Newtown, after the murder of 26 people at Sandy Hook Elementary, the tide turned in favor of more gun control legislation.  The thinking, from Democratic leaders and even some Republicans was, “Surely we can do something.”  Now, almost four months after twenty 6- and 7-year-old children were gunned down in their classroom, new legislation to reduce gun violence is not only disappearing, but existing laws will possibly be weakened.  Republicans in congress insist they will filibuster any attempt to infringe on 2^nd Amendment rights.  Dead children be damned.  You were one of the most outspoken among them until…

Rep. Rick Offenbach:

Until my 12-year-old son was shot and killed at a baseball game.

Daily Cup:

I’m sorry for your loss.  What happened?

Rep. Rick Offenbach:

His team was struggling so the coach was trying out different things.  He pulled the starting shortstop and replaced him with my son.  The other kid’s older brother, Nate, was…disabled.  He used to play baseball himself but was hit in the head by a line drive while pitching a few years back.  Suffered a TBI (traumatic brain injury).  Couldn’t make much sense of life.  When he saw his little brother sitting on the bench, I guess he got mad, thought he could do something about it.  Showed up at a Saturday game last month and started shooting.

Daily Cup:

He killed the coach also.

Offenbach:

And an umpire.  Then he killed himself.  They always do, don’t they?

Daily Cup:

He used a Glock?

Offenbach:

With 30 rounds.  Two other people were injured.

Daily Cup:

And so you think now some new gun laws might make a difference?

Offenbach:

I do.

Daily Cup:

Why were you so against them before?  Politico reported that the only gun you’ve ever owned was a hunting rifle.  New gun laws wouldn’t have affected you.

Offenbach:

I don’t like the government infringing on my rights.

Daily Cup:

No one does.  But protections and regulations aren’t for punitive purposes.  They’re to keep us safer.  They don’t work all the time but –

Offenbach:

– I understand that now.  That’s why I support them.

Daily Cup:

Because your son might be alive today –

Offenbach:

Maybe, yes — IF the shooter had to go through even a basic background check, but anyone can waltz into a gun show and walk out with a weapon.  He drove to one a hundred miles away, bought himself a Glock.  IF he hadn’t had so many bullets.  He was a terrible shot.  Out of the 30 rounds, there were only five victims.

Daily Cup:

But you’ve heard all the arguments the NRA makes, and successfully.  You know what you’re up against.  After Newtown, ninety percent of the country was behind new, extensive background check legislation and now we’re nowhere.  We are spineless, shameful, and prosaic.  Republican politicians, and a few Democrats, are more afraid of losing money and votes than they are of losing a loved one.  Statistics from other states and other countries with stricter gun laws point to an effective means in keeping more people alive/less people dead due to gun violence.  Forgive me for being insensitive, but you only flip-flopped because your son was killed.

At this point in the interview, Offenbach shut down.  We sat in silence for several minutes until I saw his shoulders drop.  He let out a long sigh.

Offenbach:

He was my only child.  My wife is staying with her mother because she can’t look at me.  She’s a part of that ninety percent.  Thought I should support new gun laws.

Daily Cup:

It seems to me that the GOP leadership is incapable of empathy.  They sympathized with the Newtown families but it’s not the same thing AT ALL, particularly if it only lasts five minutes.  Because they lack the imagination to put themselves in another’s shoes, and the courage to say no to the gun lobby, we are no further in addressing gun violence in this country.  What would you say to the comparisons being made between you and Senator Rob Portman of Ohio, who only came out in support of gay marriage after learning his own son was gay?

Offenbach:

I’d say personal experience is a powerful motivator.

Daily Cup:

But President Obama, the greater majority of the Democratic leadership and the citizens of this country are not motivated by personal experience.  We’re motivated by empathy.  Most of us have not been victims of gun violence. Most of us don’t have homosexual children.  Most of us here in California are perfectly capable of driving and talking on the phone at the same time, but when presented with statistics that showed we’d be safer as a whole if we switched exclusively to hands-free, collectively we accepted new rules.  How can we convince the GOP to be leaders in sensible new gun legislation – not because of tragic personal experience – but through empathy?

Offenbach:

I’m not sure.  Most of my colleagues have expressed sorrow for my loss while avoiding eye contact with me.  I had a friend diagnosed with pancreatic cancer a few years back and I made excuses constantly why I couldn’t see him.  Heck, I couldn’t even call him because I was afraid that by acknowledging what he was going through, by being with him…like it was contagious or something.  So I suppose you’re right.  We’re afraid to be empathetic.  If they look me in the eye, they’ll have to feel some of what I feel, including the guilt of all the money we’ve taken from the gun lobby.

Daily Cup:

In 1980, California mother Candy Lightner buried her 13-year-old daughter who’d been killed by a drunk driver.  She started MADD and the estimated 30,000 drunk driving deaths that year have been reduced nearly in half, twenty-five years later.  Change takes time.  New gun control legislation – NOT punitive measures taken upon gun owners – won’t erase gun violence but it can certainly reduce it, more and more as time goes by.  The next Adam Lanza, Jared Loughner, or James Holmes may not have been born yet.  But in eighteen years, or twenty, if he goes to buy a gun and can’t, or can but not a large magazine, less people will die, including maybe someone’s son out playing baseball.  Does that sound about right to you?

Offenbach:

It does.  My colleagues have to look me in the eye when they tell me there’s nothing we can do.  I predict several of them won’t be able to, enough that we can tip the congressional balance in favor of sensible legislation, starting with universal background checks.

Daily Cup:

I hope you’re right.  Thank you for talking with me.

Offenbach:

Of course.

Read these articles:

Republicans Still Not Ready for Gun Control, Plotting Filibuster Instead by Joe Coscarelli

Don’t Know Much About Gun Laws by Joel Benenson and Katie Connolly

Armed Correlations by Adam Gopnik

The Second Amendment is All For Gun Control by Adam Winkler

Congress is back this week from their break (because they work so hard and effectively) and will address new gun control legislation.  At this point, the gun lobby is winning in ways they could only imagine in their dreams.  If only they could imagine losing a loved one to gun violence.  Call Congress.  Here’s how.

Some thoughts on current events that have nothing to do with motherhood:

The Pope: we’ll see.  He’s a Jesuit, which, according to my late father who attended Fordham, is the only order of priests worth belonging to.  Francis cares deeply about the poor and pays hotels bills on time and in person – great.  But it’s safe to say he won’t inspire radical changes within the doctrine of the Catholic Church, the changes essential for continued survival if it’s to recover from scandal and then remain relevant.  Until priests can marry and women can be ordained, I’ll continue to support my husband’s Anglican ways.  I realize permanent change happens slowly but it requires leaning into the direction of that change as a baby step.  Pope Francis exhibits no such leaning tendencies.  Too bad.  It feels like a missed opportunity – though I don’t think the conclave ever even saw an opportunity in front of them, or were aware of its necessity.  Therein lies the problem.

It came as no surprise to hear a judge struck down New York City Mayor Bloomberg’s big soda initiative.  As Justice Milton A. Tingling of Manhattan said, it was “arbitrary and capricious”.  You could be denied a big soda at a restaurant but walk down the street to the corner grocery and get all the Coke you wanted.  But that isn’t the point Sarah Palin, you childish idiot.  (Which perhaps makes me sound like a childish idiot for calling her names, but still…)  Bloomberg didn’t put the soda ban in place to demonstrate his power and illuminate big government.  He tried to draw attention to the fact that millions of New Yorkers (and Americans in general) are overweight, out of shape, and dying while costing the country billions in medical care.  Shame on him.  Let’s make sure that Big Food continues to support our need to kill ourselves, one Big Grab bag of Doritos and Big Gulp at a time.

Motherhood – it’s complicated but of this, I am sure: you pay now or you pay later.  Over the course of a weekend, any weekend (but specifically this last), my children hate me for brief periods of time.  I’ve asked them to pick up dog poop, clean their closets, hand over their cellphones at mealtime.  Occasionally, I don’t let them do the thing they want until they’ve done the thing they abhor.  They think I’m mean and sometimes, I am.  But I’m not doing them any favors by handling everything for them or conversely, letting them make a decision that isn’t theirs yet to make.  In other words, I’m still the boss (as is the husband, occasionally), which is how they’ll learn to be the boss of themselves one day.

Spring has sprung in Los Angeles and with it, the smells of night-blooming jasmine, orange blossoms, and my childhood.  No other time of year takes me back quite as much – to being nine- and ten-years-old, hiking around the hills of Encino and getting ready for the Miss Softball America season.  Life was uncomplicated, I was happy, and my parents were alive.  I miss my mom.  Just sayin’.

Stop me if I’ve told you this before: (I’m aware you can’t do that.  Let me keep writing.)  In 1999, nearly nine months pregnant with Goldie, I woke in the middle of the night for another bathroom visit.  Her birth was a mere week or two away and I suddenly thought, “This is permanent.  This isn’t just some temporary responsibility.  This kid is going to be around 24/7.  And I don’t really like kids.”  And then my heart started racing because ‘responsibility’ is not my middle name.  (Can you guess what is?)  In the days before she arrived, I told others of my panic and they all said the same thing, more or less.  “It’s different when it’s your own child.  Maternal instincts kick in.”  I thought of the billions of women (trillions?) who’d gone before me in the motherhood game and figured I wasn’t special.  I, too, would be okay.  And I was.

There’s a big soccer tournament going on in the Southland this month.  The first weekend of elimination play was supposed to be January 26-27.  Rained out, they moved the entire schedule to this past weekend.  Bun Bun’s game times were fine, down near San Diego, but Miss T’s involved a serious conflict with the Super Bowl.  I’m the big NFL fan in the family so normally, the husband would be with her except he works for a company that spent millions on an ad during the game, which he needed to track in real time on social media platforms.  And so Saturday, it was Bun Bun and I in Escondido.  Sunday, I stood shivering for Miss T’s 3:30pm kickoff up in Ventura, while the 49ers and Ravens lined up for theirs in New Orleans.  It was fútbol versus football and everyone who knows me would have thought something was terribly wrong in the universe if I wasn’t parked in front of a television yesterday afternoon with a bowl of Nacho Cheese Doritos in front of me.  And yet, I wasn’t.  It’s a crazy miracle, but the universe and I were fine.

When it comes to my children, I don’t have resentments.  I resent traffic.  I resent drivers in front of me who don’t pull out into the intersection to await a left turn.  I resent politicians who forget the reasons for which they serve.  I resent serial complainers.  I resent men sometimes when I think they have it easier than women.  (And then I remind myself they don’t.)  I resent those who won’t consider an assault weapons ban.  But with my girls, who can still annoy the hell out of me with requests, I don’t resent.  I don’t begrudge them what they need from me on their journey in life.  No, I don’t want to scoop them ice cream anymore when they can get their own, but if they’ve made a commitment and need me to help them honor that commitment – well, that’s my job and they’re my kids.  Can’t watch the first half of the Super Bowl because I’m outside on a beautiful winter’s day with my adorable ten-year-old who’s playing a mean game at center mid?  I’m okay with that.

Of course, when the whistle blew at game’s end, I hustled Miss T into the car to race the sixty miles home, hoping to start eating those Doritos early in the third quarter.  I arrived home shortly after Jacoby Jones’ record-setting touchdown, and just after the blackout.  It was a perfect power outage, allowing me to settle in, rewind, and view the highlights of Baltimore’s domination in the first half, and then watch as the 49ers made it a game.  The five of us were together, laughing at my sudden outbursts when plays fell apart, and all was good and right with the world.

To mothers out there who aren’t as far along as I am (with a fourth, sixth, and eighth grader) and think that whatever phase their child is going through, it will be the end of the world as they know it – it gets better.  I love being with my kids.  Things are still messy (literally and figuratively) but the girls are turning into creatures with whom I totally enjoy hanging out.

And okay, speaking of the Super Bowl, a few thoughts:

- I was rooting for the 49ers despite the fact that Jim Harbaugh’s temper scares me and I always hated how he’d come off the field when he played for the Colts and tell reporters first and foremost how he needed to thank his Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.  I’m convinced that Jesus doesn’t pick teams in the NFL.  (It’s the same reason I’m bothered by Tebow, and Ray Lewis, among others.)

- Colin Kaepernick will have his day.  He and RGIII are the most exciting quarterbacks I can remember watching.

- I shunned social media during the game.  Too much pressure in the competition to come up with the funniest retort about the blackout.

- Beyonce nailed it.  Wow.

- Didn’t see many commercials but had no idea farmers were so awesome.  Cried over the Budweiser/”Warhorse” spot.  Hated the godaddy.com one.

Re: the gun control debate.  Did you watch the hearings?  Grrrrrrr.  Arrrrrrgh.  The gun lobby is counting on all of us to lose interest and/or cower beneath their constitutional confidence.  For today, read this: “Dangerous Gun Myths” from yesterday’s New York Times, and email Senator Susan Collins, R-Maine, because she has a history of sensibility and could move from the dark Republican congressional side of this issue and come towards the light.

Make it a good week.