Stair master

Why do people walk up and down escalators? When I get off the metro and I'm not in a rush, I like to enjoy my escalator experience. And it's not as if most people are running down; they just casually walk. So why not just stand there and take a look around you? Take a breath and don't focus so much on where you're going (most probably to work). You'll spend enough time thinking about it while you're there for most of your day.

But that was just a thought I had this morning. Now on to the real stuff.

A & I are trying to sell his 1br apartment and buy a 2br. As is quite obvious, living in a 2br apartment gives us more flexibility in regards to our long-term plans in DC and provides a bit more comfort. We'd like to move once and stay there for as long as possible, so the long-term plan includes the next few years when A will be focusing on writing his dissertation, and X number of years after that, when kids slowly come into the picture. So the total number of years can be five or seven or more, who knows at this point? (Since when did 5 years constitute "long term planning"?)

In short, we're looking for an apartment that will accomodate us and at least one kid, perhaps two, before we have to start thinking about finding a bigger place. But that's the ideal-- it seems like most people in our community are looking for that these days.

We've seen a few apartments so far. Some of our criteria include the following:

- 2 bedrooms;
- more than 1 bathroom;
- within the areas of Foggy Bottom, Dupont (south of the circle), and Georgetown, to faciliate a >-1 mile walk to synagogue every week;
- access to the metro, preferably the orange/blue lines;
- a balcony;
- a decent size kitchen ("decent" = something bigger then the kitchen I have now. I don't think that's asking for too much);
- if in a building, location on a low floor.

There are others, but these are what's important.

So far, we haven't seen anything that's perfect, but that's to be expected. The one apartment that is really intriguing is a 2br apartment. This apartment has two MASTER bedrooms and it comes with a parking spot. Everything else should just fall by the wayside considering it's difficult to find a 2br apartment with a decent size 2nd bedroom. Here you have two master-size bedrooms! Which means that there's no doubt there would be space for an office/study now, and one or two kids down the road. That should be perfect, right?

Well, perhaps. Except the apartment is on the 8th floor. Why does that matter? Walking up and down 8 flights of steps, at least 4 or 5 times every week in the span of 25 hours (ie, Shabbat), is tough. And I think I would be willing to suck it up, except for the fact that if we're planning on having kids at some point while living in this apartment, it would require using the steps and carrying a baby, stroller, and baby bag all at the same time. I dont plan on being that mother who stays cooped up in the house every weekend unless the baby is sleeping. I'd like to go to synagogue, go out for meals, and see my friends as much as possible-- and I know it's possible, because every week I see parents coming to synagogue with their newborns, so why can't I?

It's a tough call. This apartment is the only one we've seen so far that provides the stability that a large second bedroom provides to a couple wanting at some point to have a family and is within our price range.

Perhaps there are arrangements we could work out with the building, where we would be able to store the stroller downstairs from Friday night-Saturday night. Climbing those stairs every week would certainly get me into shape as well. But would living on such a high floor deter our friends (with or without kids) from accepting dinner invitations? Would it deter lazy ol' me from going to synagogue as often as I do now? Would it become more of a hassle or would we really appreciate having the space and knowing that we don't have to move for perhaps even more years than we first anticipated? What would you do?

For the last week or so, coworkers and friends and I would talk about Election Night prospects and what the results would hold for the Democrats. While I had been very optimistic about their chances a month ago to control both chambers of Congress, as Election Day neared, I got more and more cautious. I remember the last crazy two Election Nights very well (2000 and 2004) and how depressing they were for me. Two years ago I was in Florida campaigning for John Kerry for a week and who can forget all the exit polls (at 6pm no less!) showing Kerry winning major states, only to be crushed with disapointment just a few hours later. There was no way I would build myself up again with hope (not that Kerry represented much of anything except that he wasn't W.) only to have it come crashing down again.

But as much as I didn't want to build up the hype and excitement, I said to a colleague of mine that I would seriously lose all hope in the American people if they indeed voted to stay the course and allow the Republican party to stay in power.

Someone wrote yesterday that what happened on Tuesday night was not an overwhelming Democratic victory but an overwhelming Republican loss. And I somewhat agree with that statement. The Republicans were voted out of office not because the voters disliked or disagreed with the invidiual Republicans running in each race. But put them all together and what do you get?

• A party that for years abused the power that was bestowed upon them.
• A party that labeled their opposition, citizens and public servants no less!, as haters of their own country.
• A party who was so full of themselves that they refused to listen to anyone who disagreed. And anyone who did disagree with them obviously hated America and supported the terrorists.
• A party who swept allegations of misconduct under the carpet.
• A party whose leadership hijacked the Constitution and brought back the imperial presidency.
• A party whose leadership doles out rewards for gross incompetence and negligence while firing those who speak up for what they believe in.
• A party with such disdain for process that they effectively shut out the opposition from conference committees and law-writing in order to push their own agenda.
• A party without a moral compass, willing to change long-standing rules to protect one of their own.
• A party whose leadership flat out lied to the citizens of this country and the entire world while claiming to be honest, compassionate, and truthful.
• A party so blinded by ideology, ego, and power that they assumed they would be able to ram terrible social policy down our throats simply because they could.
• A party with no accountability.
  

I can go on.

The Democrats didn't win as much as the Republicans lost badly. And I think that's a good thing. The Democrats won just enough to gain control of both chambers, but at the end of the day, they need the President to want to sign any legislation that they pass or else this is all just a useless exercise. They don't hold enough power in the Senate to stop a fillebuster, but just enough to set the agenda and have a hand in directing the course of the country for at least the next two years.

The lesson learned is that power corrupts, and it corrupts real badly. There should never be a time where one party leads both Congress and the White House. Debate is good. Opposition is good. It holds people accountable, and accountability is good. While the people hold the ultimate power in holding their leaders accountable, it sometimes happens much too late.

Bush has been publicly castrated, there's no doubt. He's weak and it's his own damn fault. Now it's time for him to seriously own up to his mistakes and work with the leaders on the Hill to get real stuff done.

Am I optimistic that it will happen? I dunno. I can only hope, I guess.

Is it time to measure the drapes yet?

So much to write, but it's 1am, I'm exhausted, and I have to be at work at 8am tomorrow morning. So I just have this to say-

Where's that political capital now, of which you so highly spoke?