
No compensation was received for this review. I would like it if you tried the snack to see if you enjoy it as much as I did, but that's about it.

Yesterday I went to Avenue, a plus-size store, because they were having a sale. While I wear
sizes on the smaller end of the plus scale, I really appreciate clothes that are not almost too tight. I was prepared to be skeptical, able to be convinced of goodness, if the goodness did indeed show its elusive face.
On the rack labeled $4.99, there wasn't much, some orange sweaters. But nearby, I made an awesome discovery: leggings in charcoal gray priced at $10 dollars. This is about half the price of leggings at No Skinny at the mall. (But hey, I didn't realize that it was a Portland-based company. That might change my position on some items, ie, I'd pay a little more to support a local store.)
I looked around at tops. At first I was inclined to get a t-shirt to go with the leggings, but then I stumbled on a white button-down with navy stripes. I settled on that and got it for around $1o. I work graveyard in a cubicle. It turned out to be a great outfit for work: tidy, comfortable, and attractive.
Tips for Wearing Leggings
Key #1: Make sure your top is the right length. The hem of your top should hit your upper thigh. A regular t-shirt emphasizes lumps and bumps. Anything too much longer than upper thigh threatens to unbalance the long, lean lines you achieve.
Key #2: Wear the right shoe! The right shoe for leggings or tights is flat. Ballet shoes, moccasins, skimmers are all good options. Unfortunately, heels with leggings will transport you squarely to the nearest 80's dance floor where you can fight over man candy with other women who have hairspray bangs and aren't afraid to use them.
Another key is that the best fit for leggings is slim but not tight. That is one thing that will accentuate your legs as an asset. Whatever you do, a little bit of attention to fit and detail will give you another look in your arsenal that is flexible and comfortable.
*Dinosaur art=morguefile.com+picnik.com
**Moon clip art courtesy of Clip Art ETC.

The blog entry in which I consider instances of genocide in North America...
I watched The Last King of Scotland recently. I was struck by the drama of the story, but also deeply affected by consideration of Idi Amin's reputed acts of genocide, numbering around 300,000 people. I initially reacted with relief, "Well," I thought, "at least we haven't had that kind of genocide in the US."
Then, I gave the issue further consideration. The truth is that some of the acts of war and other conflict in the US and North America can probably be considered genocide: "deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group."
There are many examples of this genocide. An early example is the Pequot War, which took place between 1634 and 1638. The Massachusetts Bay and Plymouth colonies united with an alliance of Mohegan and Narragansett tribes. Their enemy was the Pequot Tribe, which is hard to say with certainty, since Pequot and Mohegans were related. However, by the end of the war, most of the Pequot people were killed. A smaller number were sold into slavery in Bermuda.
The destruction of the Pequot Tribe was nearly total. The terms of the peace treaty after the Pequot War took specific steps to dismember the remaining people so that they could not exist as a tribe. In 1856, the State of Connecticut sold off 600 acres of Pequot land without their permission, another deliberate step to destroy Pequot as a cultural group. A lawsuit in 1976 to recover the land resulted in a $700,000 settlement.
The Manshatucket Pequot claimed Federal recognition in 1983 and went on to open a casino and bingo operation in 1992. Gambling makes the House rich. It took the Pequot tribe approximately three and a half centuries to reestablish political and economic power, but they did it.The force of this order was used to move Americans of Japanese Ancestry (AJAs) to internment or prison camps. The general feeling as voiced by the Attorney General of California at the time was that when it came to Caucasian people, there were methods to test the loyalty of them, but, [W]hen we deal with the Japanese, we are on an entirely different field." It seems like a boneheaded, idiotic thing to say, but it made perfect sense to (Paranoid) People In Power at the time. At least 120,000 Japanese-Americans were relocated. 62% of these people were American-born, second and third-generation Japanese-Americans. They were Americans. Internment in this case can be viewed as an act of genocide because of the intent to subjugate or suppress a specific cultural group.
Acts leading up to the internment movement underscore the intent of the US government to destroy the Japanese as a people. Suspicion before the war in the early 1900s led to rules that prohibited the Japanese from buying land, marrying outside their race, or owning homes in certain areas. This property right can be easily compared to the control and dismemberment of Native American tribal groups. Owning land allows people to leverage their buying power into stability and putting down roots.
After the bombing of Pearl Harbor, people spread rumors about Japanese residents in Hawaii and on the West Coast, saying that they were involved with espionage or sabotage against the United States. Wow. More brilliance in the form of scapegoating. When I examine history, I always wish I could have confidence that people today would act smarter, but they probably wouldn't. The government eventually determined that the rumors were false, but never had the good grace to mention it to the American public. Also, when it comes to this, evidently I could devote an entire blog just to Japanese-American injustice; but I'm not.
At least in these two instances, the United States and Americans of their day were involved in acts that can be classified as genocide. It is a matter of definition because genocide is an abstract, like pride or empowerment. However, to the thinking person the process of identifying genocide is not an impossible one. The very concepts of family and human dignity are the framework that says when an action goes over the line and when it fits the definition of genocide. Knowing what it is and when it has happened it the past must inform our future need to protect Americans when the government takes steps against its own citizens.
Further Reading to Make You Smarter:
Credits:
*That's not actually me considering, btw. Though that's cool, and maybe I should try making all the emotion photos myself. It's a photo by anitapatterson at morguefile.com
**Girl clip art from Clip Art ETC
1. City of Bones by Cassandra Clare: YA Fantasy: 4/5: 485 pp.
An invisible city exists in the same space as New York City, with a battle raging between Shadow Hunters and Underworlders.
2. Half Moon Investigations by Eoin Colfer: YA Fantasy: 4/5: 290 pp.
An elementary school detective solves a complex case, while being as funny and hard-boiled as a kid can be.
3. World War Z by Max Brooks: Science Fiction: 5/5: 342 pp.
The next World War is a zombie invasion, and the enemy, Zack, isn't even alive.
Up Next: The Coming of Conan the Cimmerian by Robert E. Howard.

Any or all of these would have been appreciated in the Cane Mauling of Twenty-Ten. And speaking of restitution, my buddy Kim says it took her six months to get Trimet to pay for some medical bills that their negligence caused. That sounds like forever. I hope getting a new cane doesn't take that long.
*This was a song by the group Sounds of Silence, played for the movie Love Story.
**Clip art courtesy of Clip Art ETC.
