Her Brain Tumor Causes Shoplifting But Doesn't Affect Her Work
It's so hard for most people to understand how sleazy so many of the politicians are who supposedly represent their interests, it's a relief when a legislator does what Assemblywoman Mary Hayashi (D-Hayward) did -- shoplift $2,500 in clothes from an SF Neiman-Marcus and get caught -- and then make the outrageous claim that a brain tumor may have made her do it. Nicholas Riccardi writes in the LA Times:
Hayashi's attorney, Douglas Rappaport, told reporters that the lawmaker is taking medication for a benign brain tumor and that the ailment may have been responsible for her behavior.Hayashi was arrested Oct. 25 as she left the store with a blouse, skirt and leather pants in a shopping bag. At the time, her representatives said she had meant to pay for the items but became distracted.
On Friday, spokesman Ross Warren said, "Early on she admitted she made a mistake, and today she accepted the consequences of that mistake." He added that her brain tumor has not affected her work.
Assembly Speaker John A. Pérez issued a statement supporting Hayashi. "She has owned up to her actions and taken responsibility for them," he said. "I am confident that with the close of these proceedings, she will continue to ably serve her constituents with the same talent and passion she has displayed throughout her time in office."
Sleazebag supporting a fellow sleazebag.
She left with the items in a shopping bag. How did they get in there...develop the power of motion and hop in? Do you put clothes you haven't paid for in a shopping bag before you leave the store? I mean, if you aren't a thieving scumbag?
Maybe the brain tumor gave her special powers - Psychokinesis - and her just thinking that she wanted the items caused them to move into the bag.
The Former Banker at January 7, 2012 10:03 AM
Ok, ok...but before we string her up for being a thieving scumbag, can we address the prices that Neiman-Marcus charges for their clothing? I mean, that's the real crime. The rampant consumerism engendered by corporate America started this ugly ball rolling, and now their greedy chickens are coming home to roost (tip of my hat to Malcolm X). Wah! The CEO of Neiman-Marcus can only buy one G4 this year and not two...bummer. Once again everyone hacks away at the branches of evil while completely ignoring the roots (tip of my hat to Henry David Thoreau).
Susan at January 7, 2012 10:17 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/01/07/her_brain_tumor.html#comment-2896285">comment from SusanSusan, I think you should get a head CT.
Unless you're kidding.
I'm having some difficulty figuring out whether you're highly irrational or just joking.
In case you've just been brainwashed, stores can charge whatever they want for their clothing, and you can choose to pay for them or not. Stores mark up what designers charge in order to make a profit. Should designers give away their work for free? Should the Susans of the world decide what they get to charge?
I'm answering this as if Susan is serious because there are so many Susans out there at the Occupy Wall Street protests. (How do these people stand on the street corner every day howling while I'm working my ass off to make it in this economy? When I was out of work when I was starting out as a writer, I spent every moment I had trying to get some, and worked some terrible jobs -- bike messenger, mover for all-girl moving company, substitute chicken handing out flyers on a street corner -- yes, in a chicken suit.)
Amy Alkon at January 7, 2012 10:41 AM
Brain tumors can make you do things you would not otherwise do. Whether it's true in this case, I don't know. There are parts of your brain that, when pressure is applied, can eliminate your sense of right and wrong, or your impulse control, any number of things.
momof4 at January 7, 2012 10:41 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/01/07/her_brain_tumor.html#comment-2896292">comment from momof4Interesting that we don't see her resigning.
Amy Alkon at January 7, 2012 10:46 AM
Proof that a healthy brain is not a prerequisite for politics?
No photos of the chicken suited Goddess??
DrCos at January 7, 2012 11:15 AM
I don't get your complaint. Democrats don't have to be held accountable for personal failures. They have no moral standards, so in her mind she did nothing wrong, and the good she does just by being a Democrat, and being on the side of truth and purity and light and happiness and cute polar bear cubs and taking care of the less fortunate outweighs any petty complaints from the rabble.
If she was a Republican, one could understand why there'd be great outrage. Republicans have these moral codes they are always trying to cram down everyone else's throats, which means if they do something wrong it is compounded by the high crime of hypocrisy. Add in that they support stuff that is pure evil, like going to church, and being able to profit from your hard work and pass the proceeds on to your kids, and not killing babies when they are inconvenient, it'd be a no-brainer, she should flogged, hung from a very high tree, and shot. Hopefully more than once.
Old Guy at January 7, 2012 11:23 AM
@Susan: hYou write can we address the prices that Neiman-Marcus charges for their clothing. No one makes you shop Neiman-Marcus - if you don't like their prices (I don't either), go somewhere else. High prices are not a license to shoplift; they are a license to shop elsewhere.
a_random_guy at January 7, 2012 11:32 AM
And obviously, if it iS the tumor, she should not be working.
Surely Susan was sarcasm.
momof4 at January 7, 2012 11:35 AM
Supposing for the sake of argument that she does indeed have a tumor (no evidence other then the word of a theif thus far) and it does affect her behavior (no evidence other than the words of someone hired to help her avoid criminal prossecution) then why wouldnt this same tumor also afffect her decision making processes as a legislator?
You cant have it both ways.
And another thing, if this tumor (if it even exists) is indeed benign, that means it is not growing. Which means all this time her brain has already been in a comprimised state.
lujlp at January 7, 2012 11:51 AM
Brain tumors can make you do things you would not otherwise do.
True. I've known of cases of people with closed head injuries that develop compulsive behaviors, the most memorable of which was an obese woman who would break into her neighbors' homes and eat all their food.
What I find hard to believe is that a brain condition that makes a politician a compulsive kleptomaniac doesn't affect her ability to do her job as a legislator. I'd argue that getting arrested for shoplifting is proof that the condition is interfering, and she needs to retire.
Dale at January 7, 2012 11:54 AM
What I find hard to believe is that a brain condition that makes a politician a compulsive kleptomaniac doesn't affect her ability to do her job as a legislator.
Isn't "politician" and "compulsive kleptomaniac" redundant? Could it be that the tumor makes her better at her job?
sj at January 7, 2012 12:10 PM
State the obvious: this is what the entitled elect.
Someone who feels entitled to the work of others.
Radwaste at January 7, 2012 2:35 PM
Old Guy: Republicans have these moral codes...
Thank God for Republicans and their moral codes! For example, here's Republican Rick Santorum on the immorality of birth control:
Jim at January 7, 2012 4:19 PM
Hey, contraception exists because people want to play and not pay: by design, sex results in reproduction. That cannot be wished away.
Santorum's view here is apparently shared by the Muslim world. How's that working? For that matter, what is the demographic in the USA doing? Why, it's shifting to those who do not limit the number of offspring they have.
Now, if that opinion is enough to shut you off entirely from the rest of the Santorum world, well, done and done.
But you'll have joined the great unwashed in thinking that a President, not Congress, passes bills in this country. All sorts of ignorant people allow Senators and Congressmen to promise things when they become President that are their actual jobs today - and which they are not doing now, and will be Constitutionally prohibited from doing once elected. Sucker.
Radwaste at January 7, 2012 7:06 PM
Jim -
which Is worse, what Santorum said, or "I think that at some point you've made enough money."
And it could be argued that contraception is partly responsible for our economic problems. I wouldn't argue that, just because relying on people having lots of kids to pay back enormous debt is the REAL cause, but the argument could be made.
brian at January 7, 2012 7:11 PM
I'll illustrate the absurd by being absurd:
Democrat does something crazy, like stash money that isn't his in a freezer. Person points at Republican for something. Democrat continues as before.
Somehow, that's OK?
Radwaste at January 7, 2012 7:29 PM
Rick is right about birth control. It is one of the factors in the decline of our civilization.
However, that does not mean that I believe it should be outlawed, nor would this statement prevent me from voting for him should he win the nomination. I do not expect a candidate to be 100% congruent with my own beliefs.
I find that statement far less alarming than the US President thinking that we have 57 states and a Marine Corpse, the "clinging to their Bibles and guns" statement, the concept that our problems come from not spreading the wealth around enough, our foreign policy, the fact that the President of a free republic believes he has the right to go it alone when Congress rejects his proposals, or Joe Biden being a heartbeat away from being addressed as Mr. President.
Old Guy at January 7, 2012 10:07 PM
Old Guy,
You forgot to mention his "recess appointments". He just named Richard Cordray to direct the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and he has announced three similar recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board.
Jim P. at January 7, 2012 11:08 PM
Recess appointments he made while the Congress was in session...
Anybody is better than what we have.
MarkD at January 8, 2012 5:01 AM
And before anyone jumps in with the excuse of "they're only in session for a minute each day", be aware that that's a normal procedure for a legislative body, for two reasons. First of all, a lot of legislative work is done in committees, and it's pretty normal to start the day with a pro forma convening, which is then immediately recessed for the day so that the legislators can re-convene in committee. Second, if the legislative body wants to have an open debate on something, Robert's Rules of Order make that difficult to do in a formal session, so they will recess but then remain in the chamber and convene informally. (They used to call this the "committee of the whole", but apparently that terminology isn't used any more.)
Reason has an article with a list of business that has been conducted during this "recess", which includes the passing of the payroll tax exemption.
Cousin Dave at January 8, 2012 9:07 AM
@ Amy (and anyone else I unintentionally incensed): I don't think you understood the point I was trying to make because I was too concerned about sounding clever and well-read to state it plainly. Let me do so now: shoplifting, as I see it, is merely a symptom of a much larger social problem that we should probably be...I don't know...maybe…at least considering. And while I do find it puzzling that those in the pubic eye (Winona Ryder come to mind) would act so brazenly, I prefer to leave those issues to their therapists.
@ Amy: I have been reading your column for years and I have always found you to be quick-witted and insightful; however (yes, I made it bold…what?), I must admit to being very surprised by your uncharacteristically short-sighted comment about "the Susans of the world deciding what [retailers] get to charge.” Because of course we do! We all decide. Western cultures in general, and Americans in particular, assign arbitrary value to things with little or no intrinsic value all the time (I mean…diamonds? really?) Simply put, an item is worth whatever someone is willing to pay for it. If the Susans start paying $100 for a roll of Jimmy Choo toilet paper, then that is what it's worth; and the big retailers will immediately employ hundreds of marketing experts to help us rationalize spending that amount of money and make the "less worthy" consumers feel like they are incomplete because they can't afford it. Similarly, the Susans can collectively say, "why would I pay that much just so I can wipe my butt with it?" and retailers will respond in kind. It is the reason there is as much as a dollar per gallon price differential by region in the U.S. Those of us living in California just know we would die if we had to stop driving for even a minute, so we will pay whatever we are told to pay; Midwesterners...not so much.
And, no, I am not occupying Wall Street. I believe the movement has a valid point, I just don't think they're making it very effectively. But you know what? I bet if every one of those people shoplifted at Neiman-Marcus on the same day somebody would pay attention.
Sorry...didn't mean to tirade.
Susan at January 8, 2012 11:32 AM
Anybody is better than what we have.
Too bad we have that pesky no-foreign-born presidents rule since Berlusconi is available.
Jim at January 8, 2012 12:45 PM
Susan,
If you don't like a store's prices, don't buy there. Problem solved.
When everyone else is paying $100/roll for designer toilet paper, take the $99.50 you saved per roll and buy something you think is a good value for the price or invest it for the future.
The marketing guys only have the power over you that you give them.
Most of the regional price differences for gasoline are caused taxes and regulation. If California cut gas taxes, allowed more drilling of its vast oil reserves, and allowed local refineries to operate under a reasonable regime of regulations, your gas would be lots cheaper. And there'd be more well paid working class jobs, which are the base of the economic pyramid.
Old Guy at January 8, 2012 1:01 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/01/07/her_brain_tumor.html#comment-2898293">comment from SusanThose of us living in California just know we would die if we had to stop driving for even a minute, so we will pay whatever we are told to pay; Midwesterners...not so much.
I almost spit up my coffee laughing at this one. I'm from Detroit. In both places, there are areas where one simply must drive to get around, and you can go to the gas station and jump up and down and demand that they charge you 50 cents a gallon. Ain't gonna happen -- in Rochester, Michigan or in Santa Monica, California.
I spent $153 on gas in 2010. In all of 2010. Don't know what the 2011 tally was because I haven't added it up yet, but it's probably less. I work my life so I barely have to drive anywhere. Most people probably can't do that. I also bought a Honda Insight hybrid in 2004, as the first new car I've ever had. I bought it so I wouldn't pollute (it's a SULEV - a Super Ultra Low Emissions Vehicle) but it's turned out to be really amazing in savings on gas ever since.
Amy Alkon at January 8, 2012 1:14 PM
Brian: which Is worse, what Santorum said, or "I think that at some point you've made enough money."
Brian, you left out the follow-up sentence. What he said was: "I mean, I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money. But, you know, part of the American way is, you know, you can just keep on making it if you’re providing a good product or providing good service."
It's no different than me saying that I find smoking to be disgusting and unhealthy but that "part of the American way" is that you can make disgusting and unhealthy choices if you want to.
Contrast Obama's sentiment with Santorum's. Santorum isn't just expressing his opinion about sex, that it should only be for procreation, but then going on to add "but, you know, part of the American way is, you know, you can have sex for fun if you want to." He's saying that contraception is not okay. If he could, he would very likely ban it (as well as likely banning all sexual acts that he disapproves of.)
Jim at January 8, 2012 3:23 PM
@ Old Guy: in consideration of my lengthy tirade, is it possible that you still believe my point of contention to be about actual clothing prices at a particular retailer? Oy Gevalt!
You know what Old Guy? You're right...I just won't shop at Neiman-Marcus anymore. I don't know why I didn't think of that. Thank you for candid observations.
Susan at January 8, 2012 10:02 PM
Susan,
The whole I gotta have it because everyone else thinks it is cool concept does drive a lot of people to waste their money. The answer to it is, don't do it yourself. You cannot change what everyone else does, only what you do.
When I was a child, I hated my parents response to the, everyone else does it, argument, which was, "If everyone else wanted to jump off a cliff, would you do it too?" When you are young, the answer is, "It depends on how cool the people jumping off cliffs are." As a grown-up, I now get the reasoning behind this. It took having a child for me to understand.
Neiman-Marcus can get large markups on their products because they have convinced everyone that they will increase their status if they buy and use their products. I am sure it is good stuff, but unless you have enough money that it truly doesn't matter, you are causing yourself to short something else in your life, like your retirement funds to appear higher status today.
I buy quality clothes at Land's End, Target, and Kohl's, and I always wait until it is a big sale. I could care less about the designer label, I buy what I think looks good, is designed to last, fits well, and is on sale. For example, my jeans are made by the famous designer, Levi Strauss. They come in many sizes and cuts so I can get a pair that fits me perfectly and they last many years. Last year I bought two pair for slightly under $50 with tax at a big sale.
The best solution for most is, don't do it. Step out of the game. Stop caring what other people think about you. The only way to win the game is to refuse to play. It is the only path that leads to liberation.
Old Guy at January 9, 2012 7:40 AM
"Those of us living in California just know we would die if we had to stop driving for even a minute, so we will pay whatever we are told to pay; Midwesterners...not so much."-Susan
"I almost spit up my coffee laughing at this one."-Amy
Ha! Yeah, me too, Amy. Susan, I live in southern Wisconsin, and I'd would just love to hear your proposal for how we can get to our jobs when we need to traverse 20 miles of farmland without a car? While some midwestern cities may not require a vehicle, I would say it's probably MORE likely that people in the midwest rely on their cars.
Angie at January 9, 2012 8:28 AM
Susan, since your second post totally walked back your first one, I'm at a loss as to what your point is.
Cousin Dave at January 9, 2012 8:18 PM
Leave a comment