These are the questions that plague our household.
1: Do babies need to wear pants? Now that it's warm and all? 0r not just pants, any sort of leg covering. I mean, one obvious answer is a resounding "no," because pants are mostly decorative at this point. This is usually Brandon's answer. But my answer is more complicated because I have a nagging desire to protect his legs (they are so sweet and soft!) and also because I have the vague sense that it's somehow...gauche...to go pantless all the time.
I surprise myself by having this response, because normally social propriety is not really a concern for me, so I think I'm going to have to ponder this one some more. I guess then we also have question
1a: Why does Sarah have the nagging sense that babies need pants?
2: What would we do if we were democratic strategists? This is a question we think about in the mornings, while listening to NPR. Being a little out of the policy wonk loop these days, we have very few good answers (Kate would be better at this game, probably). But even in our out-of-the-loopishness, we think: JEEZE. TIME FOR A NEW STRATEGY, STRATEGISTS! Brandon this morning proposed a bill that would require troops to come home for good after finishing tours, no extentions. The "protect military families" bill, or something. I'm also interested in the John Edwards proposal to resend the no-funding bill. I think that might be sort of an effective gesture: dems offered the compromise 1/2 funding bill, Bush refused to compromise, so we're going back to our initial proposal. I dunno. If we figure it out, we'll get back to you. Maybe we need a "No Troops Left Behind" act? Hmm.