Almost all of my interactions with differently abled people occur at the YMCA. Tuesday morning, while showering, shaving, and getting dressed for work, I surreptitiously listened  to a dude rapping non-stop. Clearly on the autism spectrum, I enjoyed how he rhymed away oblivious to those around him.

Same thing this morning. From the showers I heard, “There’s money all around you, one million right there in the air. . . I am the source and a force” and something about “breaking legs”. Then he suddenly appeared at the blow dryer.

Ron: That’s really good stuff. Is it other people’s or your own?

Free Styler somewhat taken aback: What, my free-styling?

Ron: Yeah. Is it your own stuff?

Free Styler: Yeah, it’s all mine.

Ron: It’s really good.

Free Styler: Thanks.

Ron: Do you perform?

Free Styler: Yeah, all the time.

Ron: Where?

Free Styler: At home. In my studio. I don’t like people. I hate performing for people.

Ron: Cool. It’s really good stuff.

I’m not bullshitting, the guy is talented, but few will ever know that.

Given the (understandable) tendency of artists to market their stuff to the hilt, I dig the image of my new acquaintance sitting in his home studio throwing down original rhymes for hours on end. I’d love to eavesdrop on a session, but know an invitation will not be forthcoming. And that’s okay. Knowing his art enriches his life is consolation enough.

A conservative friend of mine, let’s call him Domingo Montoya, is determined to recast himself as a Centrist. I’ll stifle my chuckles and give him more credit when he parts with his Reagan-Bush and Bush-Cheney t-shirts. I know, I know, I should encourage his personal transformation; instead, I derisively call him a faux-centrist.

Recently, I was surprised to learn that someone I had pegged as a classic liberal is in fact a centrist. If you follow American politics, you know him, and no, it’s not Kasich.

“X has said the he follows the ‘canoe theory’ of politics: ‘You paddle a little on the left and a little on the right, and you paddle a straight course.'”

“X. . . sees danger in the growing discord between Democrats and Republicans. ‘The last time we had that, we had the Civil War,’ he said.”

“. . . X’s opposition to Trump is somewhat different. On occasion, he drops some ‘rhetorical bombs,’ as he has called them, but he prefers a measured, pragmatic approach. X rejects the idea that a state can offer sanctuary from the federal government, and he does not like to talk about ‘the Resistance,’ either.”

“If, as now seems possible, Democrats dominate the 2018 and 2020 elections, and they end up governing as unilaterally as the Republicans have, X fears that ‘a cycle will be created, in which one side pushes as far as it can until it’s thrown out, then the next one does it, and then it will happen again.’ He compared it to a car ‘fishtailing’: ‘I was driving on the freeway, I don’t know how fast, and I almost missed the exit, and made a hard right onto the ramp. Luckily, I got control back. But it’s that kind of perturbation of a system. So,’ he resumed, ‘the Democrats get more extreme, the Republicans get more extreme, and you have an ungovernable America. And a stop-start, not-reliable superpower. Other people will have to react to that level of uncertainty, and that will not be positive for America’s role in the world. Therefore, it’s very important to take prudential steps to keep a stable society. I’ve always thought that’s important—to keep balance. Don’t push things too far, because it will unnerve people.”

Who is the mystery centrist? The answer is here.

We tend to exaggerate our importance to our workplaces. The longer someone has been at a job, the more inclined they are to think they’re irreplaceable. In actuality, after I leave my job, and you leave yours, things will be just fine.

I realize that because I’ve been thinking about how many times my co-workers mention the three people who have left for other jobs or retired in the last couple of years. The harsh reality of it is hardly ever. The saying “Gone, but not forgotten,” doesn’t jive with my experience.

Dear Paul,

Normally, I’m down with your writing, but this particular twitter stream of yours makes liberalism an easy target. People, whatever their economic standing, have some agency. I must be a bad liberal because I do not believe there’s a vast Republican, capitalist conspiracy preventing the poor from walking, riding bicycles, and passing on fast food if they choose. But then again, I’ve never won a Nobel Prize.

Sincerely yours,

Ron

1. Police apologize.

2. The most important personal finance guru in America.

3. College is getting kinda expensive.

4. My kind of trip.

From Rachel Sherman’s, Uneasy Street: The Anxieties of Affluence.

“A more egalitarian distribution of resources across communities (national or otherwise) can be defended as a morally better form of social organization because it benefits more people and, ultimately, society as a whole. But advancing such a perspective is still no easy task. Wealthy people tend to resist giving up their short-term advantages, and their outsize political and media power means that they disproportionately control both the terms and the outcomes of the debates on these issues.”

Next, I think I’ll chip away at The New Yorker mountain that has formed over the last few months. Speaking of which, it’s not every day I get to say that a colleague and friend has a poem in The New Yorker. Such a brilliant writer.

News alert, we live in hyper-partisan times. Because so many people are on edge, tact and diplomacy are at a premium. The Right refers to this as “political correctness”, I think of it as civility.

When it comes to your thoughts though, I’m happy to report that you still have unlimited freedom. It’s perfectly fine for extremist conservative or liberal or anarchist or whatever thought to percolate between your ears. You may even be so bold as to journal about all of your wonderfully extremist thoughts.

We have daily reminders though of the costs of letting those thoughts bubble out without much consideration for how they are going to be received by others. Think of those as “What was he or she thinking?” moments. The answer of course is they were not, at least not enough.

During this morning’s run, I listened to a National Public Radio story titled “Olympia Braces For Change, But Some Homeowners Aren’t Thrilled”.

The story in short:

“Leaders in Olympia are trying to adapt to changing demographics and make room for an influx of new residents, but their plan is rankling some homeowners.

City leaders are considering changes to zoning across roughly two-thirds of the city that would allow for more of what they call “missing middle” housing in single-family neighborhoods.

That ‘middle’ is multi-family housing that falls between a single-family home and an apartment building, such as a duplex, triplex, townhome, cottage, or accessory apartment.

Olympia officials hope is to address a mismatch in the housing stock: 70 percent of the city’s households are just one or two people, yet much of the city’s housing is single-family homes designed for larger families.”

Enter Bob Jorgenson:

“’The potential changes we’re talking about are going to be basically a reverse re-gentrification of a neighborhood,’ said Bob Jorgenson, who has lived in Olympia for 30 years. ‘We’re going to be putting multi-family where multi-family is not appropriate.'”

Bob’s opposition to the policy seems reasonable enough, ultimately, he’s just exercising his First Amendment Rights. But these are not ordinary times and Bob’s problem is he’s woefully out-of-touch with the larger context of growing income inequality in the United States and rising homelessness in Olympia.

Then there’s the “money” sentence in the short, illuminating story:

“Jorgenson, who created a Facebook page to rally residents against the plan, said he’s worried about worsening traffic, declining home values, and changing the aesthetics of single-family neighborhoods.”

Changing the aesthetics. For shitssake. It’s okay to think like Bob, but if you care at all about living peacefully with your neighbors, keep your self-centered, politically regressive thoughts to your self.

Bob cares more about the looks of his neighborhood than he does growing inequality, poverty, and homelessness. I predict Bob is going to get creamed tonight at City Hall at 6:30p.m. It’s dinner date night with the Gal Pal. Maybe we’ll go to Ramblin’ Jacks and hop across the street afterwards to watch Bob get tarred and feathered for being inexcusably out-of-touch.

Maybe I’ll even boost his spirits with a gift, a notebook, in which he can journal all about single-family neighborhood aesthetics.

Every educator’s lament. However, not when The Good Wife ace’s her pop quiz.