Nicholas Kristof wrote an excellent op-ed in today’s New York Times about some basic facts that have gotten lost in the vitriolic debate over healthcare reform. Specifically, he cites statistics from no less an authority than the American Medical Association that 62% of all personal bankruptcies are tied to healthcare bills. And of that percentage, an incredible 78% of those people had health insurance.

Kristof writes eloquently about how our current system breaks up families and, despite the absence of so-called “death panels” actually hastens or contributes to the deaths of as many as 18,000 people every year. To illustrate this, he writes about a loving couple who were forced to divorce in order to protect the wife’s retirement savings so that her ill husband could qualify for Medicaid. Their only other option would have been to spend down all their assets, leaving the wife penniless and caring for a husband with dementia.

That got me to thinking. Aren’t those sign-wielding, gun-toting, anti-government crackpots that have been braying and bullying their way through healthcare town halls the same folks pushing for an amendment to the Constitution defending marriage? Apparently, it’s more important to these people that gays be prevented from exercising a basic human right than it is to protect heterosexual couples from having to split up over medical bills. Like their stance on abortion, it’s a case of “do what we say is right, but once you do, you’re on your own.”

Once again, the far Right proves that the only thing it stands for is hypocrisy. Defense of marriage, my ass.

The advent of social networking has brought people closer together, there’s no doubt about that. But sometimes, it brings people too close for comfort and the question arises, how do you distance without drama? A personal note? A simple de-friend or unfollow with no explanation? What’s the new etiquette?

I think I’ve learned the answer the hard way this last week both by clumsily unfollowing several people on Twitter and being de-friended on Facebook by someone different. I’ve experienced it from both sides, so to speak.

People view their social networking personas as an extension of themselves. To be de-friended or unfollowed can feel like a very personal rejection. Distancing or severing social networking ties requires a delicate touch if you wish to retain the friendship behind the screen. Sometimes, a person is so attached to their social networking persona that it’s not possible to separate one from the other. I might be able to see that someone has de-friended me, scratch my head for a moment and move on. Other people are going to be far more upset. It’s the nature of people.

I’ve come to the conclusion that the only acceptable etiquette is no etiquette at all. You just do it. Click the button and walk away. Don’t bother trying to cushion the blow or explain yourself because there’s nothing you can say that doesn’t amount to, “I don’t want to read what you’re putting out there.” If someone’s going to be hurt by that, they’re going to be hurt and you can’t stop it.

Should the person ask for an explanation, don’t provide one. Instead, say this: “It was a personal decision. You can still get in touch with me via (Facebook, email, telephone, whatever),” and leave it at that. Otherwise you risk getting drawn into a protracted social networking drama war with all it’s attendant idiocy and really, no one wants that.

Life. Learning the lessons and passing them on. That’s all it’s really about.

Travel and mom duties have kept me away for nearly a month and I’ve got a huge backlog of things to write about. But I found this article in my travels today and I just had to share it.

It contains some startling facts about the almost total food desert that exists in Detroit. One factoid: “About 80 percent of the residents of Detroit buy their food at the one thousand convenience stores, party stores, liquor stores, and gas stations in the city.” Walk into a convenience store today if you get the chance and imagine being restricted to the offerings there. Sobering, isn’t it?

However, unlike a lot of articles I’ve read in urban newspapers over the past few years, this one offers an equally startling, innovative solution. Turn the vast tracts of abandoned land in Detroit into cropland. From the article: “An American Institute of Architects panel concludes that all Detroit’s residents could fit comfortably in fifty square miles of land. Much of the remaining ninety square miles could be farmed.”

What an amazing thought. The entire article is highly worth reading and I encourage you all to take the time to do so. Peace out…