Dan and I attended an enjoyable production of The Marvelous Wonderettes last night at the Laguna Playhouse.  The musical production focuses on music of the 50's and 60's in a nostalgia setting with just enough plot to keep the songs bouncing along.

We thoroughly enjoyed the music, performed admirably by the all-female cast.  Of particular note were Misty Cotton as "Missy" and "Darcie Roberts as "Cindy Lou."  All of the women performed numbers that hit their vocal range just right, but these two nailed their characters and every note in their solos.

The sets were spot on, as they say, capturing a high school gymnasium in anytown America with style and a sense of the distant rumblings of change that the "heartland" felt as aftershock to the wilder shifts on West and East Coast during the sixties.  We were also treated to a particularly involved audience volunteer who played along with a running gag handsomely.

As musicals go, The Marvelous Wonderettes is one of those confections that seem to play so well these days.  A pastiche of nostalgic songs, a smattering of plot and pleasing performers.  I did find myself longing, midway, for more challenging fare.  Something like Ragtime or Evita.

But in regional theater, this is what we get.  A pleasant evening.  Not too memorable but enjoyable.  An excellent date night.

And perhaps, that's the point. 

In and amongst various daily activities (gym, gardening, editing trip photos), I've had a bit of a political junkie's fest today.  (Picture a couch potato sitting amongst the detritus of a day spend with chips, popcorn, soda, candy...glasses askew.  Got it?  That's me only in a non-caloric sort of way.)

I started off by reading the next to last chapter in Barack Obama's book, The Audacity of Hope.  As sheer fate would have it, the topic of this chapter is "The World Beyond Our Borders" and in it, Obama articulates a nuanced, coherant view of the world we share with others and our nation's best strategies for going forward.  He touches on history, illustrates how the Cold War shaped our responses in the late 20th century, and develops a pragmatic approach to a drastically changed world.

(It's a must read, really.)

I continued my political-junkie-fest with three episodes of the weekend shows, catching up completely on Meet the Press and up to the July 4th weekend on This Week with George Stephanopolous.

In some ways, the shows were illuminating.  On Meet the Press, I enjoyed hearing from the governors of Wyoming and Colorado about their constituencies, local issues and the presidential race.  Arnold was in rare form as Tom Brokaw did his best to pin him down on California's weakening economy.  I suppose the high point of Stephanopolous's two shows was his interview of Ralph Nadar where he got the spoiler of 2000's election to admit that Obama would be better than McCain.

But here's where the empty calories started.  In each of the three shows, the talking heads argued vigorously about who is a bigger flip-flopper--McCain or Obama.  And given that one or the other of them was a flip-flopper, who would be most damaged by flipping this way on one issue or that way on another.

Since I've been reading Obama's book, my ears perked up when one of the accusations of him flip-flopping had to do with his approach to the Iraq war.  Some people have read his recent comments about consulting with commanders on the ground while formulating policy to be a reversal of his commitment to remove troops from Iraq asap.

Here's where good fortune stepped in.  Yesterday, Obama gave a lengthy speech outlining his strategy for a far-reaching security policy for the United States going into the 21st Century.  Having read the chapter (written two years ago) and listened to the speech, I can tell you that the bones of Obama's philosophy have not changed. 

On this issue, at least, he has neither flipped, nor flopped, but refined.

And isn't that what we want?  What we even need?  More to the point, if a leader is wrong about a policy or a decision to, say, go to war with a country--don't we want a leader who can change his mind, adjust his stance, respond to the current realities?  Haven't we had enough of a presidency where once decisions are made they are proof against new information?

McCain's supporters fell all over themselves to accuse Obama of wavering and to claim that their guy doesn't waver, is committed to victory.  Unfortunately for them, it left me asking the question--do we want a guy who's idea of victory is informed by the Cold War policies that led to Vietnam?  Or do we want a guy who sees the path to the future?

I've heard from a number of folks who think McCain's the ticket because he's "more experienced."  I think it's time for fresh thinking in our leadership.

And time for me to get off the political junk food!

We enjoyed a visit this evening with our friends, Paul & Patty Ellis.  We met Paul and Patty over 20 years ago while we were attending Trinity Baptist Church in Indio.  The Ellises have been missionaries in the Philippines for 25 years now and our paths crossed during one of their home furloughs when we had a couple of their children, Bobby and Peter, in our youth group.

The years have led us on very different paths and yet whenever we sit with them, I am reminded more of our commonalities than our differences.  In recent years, I have been through a number of spiritual trials that have brought me to a different type of faith (although of largely the same brand).  The Ellises have been through many trials of their own and those trials seem to have led them in more traditional paths.  Yet we share the language of our young faith...we share the wiser understandings of the divine and the mundane to which our gray hair attests.

And we share a common interest in leaving this world better for having passed through it, along with a common hope for life beyond this particular, mortal realm.

It was good to break bread with them, to share fellowship.  To listen and to hear.

I keep thinking that my blog will take a turn toward the political once again.  But it strikes me, seeing the New Yorker's attempt at satire, that we are deep into silly season.

So I say yes to Dan and head out for another round of golf instead of blogging about the latest news on the campaign trail.

However.

Two things caught my eye today on the political front.

1.  McCain's nebulous commendation of privatizing social security.  Calling it a "disgrace" that the wages of young Americans feed the social security of today's recipients while these same young Americans have no guarantee of a payout themselves, McCain suggested that the time has come to allow younger taxpayers to pay themselves via the stock market.  As noted in this article, curious timing to say the least.  We're in what seems to be a market free-fall. 

Let's see.  The ponzi scheme of Social Security wherein my kids pay for me...or the Vegas style betting of the stock market where...if I'm lucky...I get paid.  Which would you choose?

2.  The "satirical cartoon" on the New Yorker cover. 

What would make it a satire for me is if depicted a potential voter in front of a p.c., swallowing whole-heartedley the image of Obama as a Muslim, Michelle as a terrorist and the Oval Office with an American flag on fire beneath a portrait of Osama bin Laden.

When it's just the image? 

Well, there's a fine line between satire and fear-mongering and I'm afraid Barry Blitt erred on the side of depiction (of a pack of lies) rather than satire.

The good news for the day?  I shot a 100...Dan had a record 1-over on the back nine.

(And I beat him on the front nine...not that I'm competitive.)  He pounded me overall.

I vote for golf.

What a fun weekend!  It started on Friday with our trip down to San Diego--a bit of traffic but not anything like going north on Friday afternoons.  We pulled into Dad and Sally's somewhere around 4 p.m. and found brother, Darrell, busily winding up our grand-nephew, David with the various forms of small torture that toddlers love and men love to dole out.

We passed the afternoon with talk, playing games with David, snacks and general family time.  Amy joined us after a while and we got to have a good visit with her as well.  David was loathe to leave, but he was eventually persuaded (aka "rounded up") by Uncle Dan.

After a quick meal of mexican food at the local cantina, we were all in bed early.  Amazing how quickly a toddler can wear out five adults.  We needed our sleep because our tee time for Saturday was at 6:40 a.m.  We met brother, Dean, and sister-in-law/friend, Donna at the executive course formerly known as Singing Hills.

Since we were a five-some, the starter insisted we all use motorized carts and charged us for three carts.  I wanted to walk the course, so I ignored the instructions and walked while the others rode.  On the longer holes and the path between the 3rd and 4th/7th and 8th holes, I hitched a ride on the back of the carts.  That was an e-ticket ride in itself.

I had a magical day of golf, scoring my lowest ever on that course, a 64. (I had two birdies, seven parts, and two double bogies...the rest were bogies...woohoo!)  Part of the credit goes to the golf lesson I recently mentioned, part to Dan's coaching about putting, and part to the fact that I was so relaxed in this group of people I love.  Donna is learning to play and is already better after 11 outings than I was after 5 years.  Her natural athletic ability and her aggressive swing make her a wonderful player and playing partner. 

Everyone had a good round, despite the humidity and the heat.  There was lots of encouragement, teasing, a few impromptu lessons and a fair share of friendly competition.  Afterward, Sally met us for breakfast at the coffee shop.  Then we hightailed it over to our grand-niece, Ainsley's, first birthday party.

There we enjoyed the company of many other folks in the family--Dennis (proud grandpa), Brian and June (proud parents), an assortment of "greats" (uncles, aunts, grandparents) and a manageable passle of kids including Ainsley's adorable brother, Avery.  It is always like coming home to spend time with my family, regardless of location.

The party was followed by spaghetti and salad, specially prepared by Sally for Dan.  Donna joined us and we had another good visit over delicious food.  By the time dinner was over, we were all pretty much monosyllabic with exhaustion.  Too much sun.  Too much fun.  And just enough family love to satisfy.

I've been struggling a bit with my drives since I got back from vacation, so at Dan's recommendation, I took a lesson yesterday from a nice young man named Alex.  Alex is one of two pros at our club and he has a casual approach to teaching that really works for me.  It relaxes me and lets me think about what he's saying.

He had me hit about five drives and then gave me the pointer that's been bouncing around in my mind ever since.  Focus on the target, not on the ball.

He said I have a lovely backswing but when it comes to my forward swing, things get very mechanical, very tight, very focused on the ball.  We worked for about 40 minutes on getting the feel of "throwing the club toward the target."  After the lesson, Dan and I played a few holes at the club and darned if I didn't hit the longest drive I've hit in quite some time--177 yards.

I even tattooed a fairway wood about 30 yards farther than I normally hit that club.  Clearly, there will be some golfing adjustments that need to be made once this lesson "sticks."

It occurs to me that there is something in this lesson for our lives, too.  How often do we get focused on the mechanics of our day?  What time to get up, how often to work out, what to eat or not, whom we owe a call (or twitter or text message to), the myriad little tasks that demand to be done now.

There's nothing wrong with planning.  There's absolutely nothing wrong with to-do lists and accomplishments of tasks.  But the question crosses over from golf into life.  What is your target?

Once you know that, life becomes much easier when you're focusing your momentum "out there," on the target.  The extraneous, the things that trips us up, the mechanics of life give way to pursuit of the goal.

So, tee it up folks.  And swing toward your target.

I started my research on California's propositions today, starting with Proposition 1; a bond measure authorizing the issuance of $9.95 billion in general obligation bonds to fund a high-speed rail system in California. 

In general, I vote against bond issues.  But this one catches my fancy a bit, despite its enormous price tag.  With gas prices gushing upwards like oil wells used to, it seems a good time to consider a significant investment in a reasonable transportation alternative.

Airlines rely on fossil fuels.  So do cars.  So an electrically powered train that gets me from Los Angeles to San Francisco in 2 hours and 42 minutes seems like an attractive, environmentally sound alternative.

Unfortunately, there's just not all that much information available yet.  The voter's pamphlet hasn't been published, so I have no idea of the total cost for the bond issue (including interest) and the fiscal impact on the state of California.  There aren't any websites up and running, either pro or con.  Although there is a website for the high-speed rail comission that has some information (predictably from a pro-rail viewpoint). 

And the closest thing I could find to an analysis was a 231 page analysis from UC Berkely published in 1995--when assumptions about gas prices were somewhat lower than today's realities.  I read the chapter on high speed rail and compared it to the chapter on driving.  I skimmed the conclusion--air travel is cheapest.  But again, the study didn't take into account just how high fuel costs have risen...and it did indicate that when one considers social costs, high-speed rail is clearly preferable.

I'll follow up with a formal summary once the cost information is in and once I can review (less dense) reports about the issue.  But I'm leaning toward a yes vote as of today.

And leaning away from in-depth research on these propositions for a few more weeks.  Hmmm.  More time for golf.

That's not a bad thing.

This is where I really earn my pay as your self-appointed California Propositions reviewer--researching and providing a summary of the initiatives, along with my vote recommendation.

Oh...wait.  I don't earn any pay.  Hmmm.  Use the Amazon links I put in once in a while and we'll call it even.

At any rate, there are 11 propositions on the ballot this November: Three constitutional amendments, three bond initiatives and five proposed statutes to amend various laws...most having to do with criminal sentencing and parole since our prison systems are so "fubar-ed."

I will be setting up another page on the site here, similar to what I had before the last election, that provides information regarding each proposition.  I plan to get through all of them by the end of August, so keep checking back and I'll updated you via the blog when I post a new summary.

Of most importance to me (and to lots of folks I know) is Proposition 8--a proposal to amend our constitution to limit marriage to heterosexuals.  As you probably know from a previous post, I am unabashedly for the right of every individual to marry the individual of his or her choice, regardless of gender.  I'll go into my reasoning when I summarize the proposition, but wanted to mention this initiative in particular today for two reasons.

1.  I'm passionate about this issue.  I'm honored with the friendship of many wonderful heterosexual and homosexual couples (and individuals).  It's been a source of increasing cognitive dissonance to me that some among us are perfectly comfortable relegating these neighbors, friends and fellow citizens to a second-class status.

2.  This is a constitutional amendment, yet it requires a bare majority to pass.  (Doh!)  I've got a bit more research to do to see if it's something that the California Supreme Court can overturn (again) as they did in their elegant and beautiful ruling earlier this year.  In the interim, I'm urging everyone to vote no on 8 and get clear on their reasons for doing so.

So all this to say, stay tuned.

From the national perspective, I must share that I was irritated by the LA Times today with their front page article about Obama's "agenda."  The writer, Peter Nicholas, quotes folks far and wide (many of them conservatives or Clintonites--interesting bed-fellows) who say that the price tag for Obama's proposed programs in the environment, health care, education and infrastructure is higher than the money he would save by ending the war in Iraq, closing tax loopholes and ending the Bush tax cuts for the nation's wealthiest 5%.

Giving Nicholas the point, for a moment, that campaigning is different from governing and many proposals wither under the conflicting demands of the oval office, I have two issue with this article.

1.  It belongs on the op-ed page.  There's no real meat to Nicholas's analysis and he relies mostly on folks who have axes to grind for the nay-saying opinions.

2.  Where is the corresponding article about John McCain's plan to keep us in a war that's already cost us upward of $1 TRILLION while cutting yet more taxes?  There's a nod to the fact that we have a $400 billion projected budget deficit, but Nicholas merely states that Obama would "inherit" the deficit.  He doesn't say a blinking thing about the deficit being inherited from Bush--who McCain is at pains to emulate in terms of fiscal policy.

I'll be writing a snippy letter to the editor about the slant of their coverage.  It wouldn't surprise me in the Orange County Register, but the LA Times?  Sheesh.

The election is looming.  There are issues to be parsed, referenda to be dissected.  And then there are the various tasks that fall to me as the family real estate professional to which I must attend.  So it's indeed time to get back to work.

Easier said than done on a gorgeous Laguna Niguel day, where the breeze was wafting in the windows at a cool 70 degrees this morning.  Work was planned, but golf was calling and so I opted for 18 holes at our new club with the full, virtuous intention of doing work after.

That was before the course chewed me up and spat me out.

70 degrees in the morning became 95 degrees by noon.  The score I posted (113) was a touch over my index but WAY over my expectations so there were all sorts of life lessons to be learned (chief among them that I need a golf lesson)...but that's never a pleasant process for me and I must confess that my evil twin Moira showed up a time or two on the links.

After we got home, all my plans to work in the afternoon vanished in a weary haze.  I futzed around on the computer.  We had pizza for dinner and watched a couple of good, older flicks. 

I did accomplish something today, though.  My magazine stack is down by about 5 mags.  Two issues of Food and Wine, an issue of Newsweek, an issue of Star (we get it for the crossword) and a travel magazine.

Back to work, indeed.

But seriously, I will be doing the issues research for the California Propositions first and the comparing candidate positions from their books over the next 30 days, gearing up to the conventions.  Hold me to it.

That's how I'd describe our day today.  It's about 78 degrees with a mild breeze stirring through the house and cooling down the patio.  We've had a lunch of barbequed chicken brochette and bbq corn.  Relaxed in the cool water of the spa.  I've been reading and now we're about to settle down to a Sunday afternoon film. 

After I rose this morning, I took the complex, compelling book I'm reading (Case Histories by Kate Atkinson) to the loft.  It's a great book and I recommend it to anyone who appreciates mysteries and good character studies.  I alternately read and napped until Dan got up.  Then we had breakfast at a little cafe near us before heading over to the farmer's market to pick up fresh veggies and fruit.

Yesterday was pretty sweet too.  I met my friend, Lynne, in Pasadena (which it turns out is about half way between Valencia and Laguna Niguel, at least in California terms of driving time).  Lynne's daughter, Jess, and two of her friends were along.  We ate sushi, shopped, got caught up, saw a movie (Wanted with Angelina Jolie--B minus at best but notable for its special effects and ironic tone).

I was stopped once and asked about my Obama shirt (Got Hope?).  I got at least four positive comments on the shirt from Obama supporters.  So at least in Pasadena, the mo' seems to be behind my choice for President. 

There are times like this, where life is easy and uncomplicated, where the breeze cools you down, company is sweet, food is delicious and all indeed seems right with the world.  I used to think these times were how life was meant to be always.  I know better now.  These times are what make the crappy days worth slogging through.

Off to enjoy this one while it lasts.