August 04, 2004
Poetry Wednesday
A quick one today, 'cause i'm very busy. Today's selection was written by the 19th century American poet Richard Watson Gilder. i thought it was kinda amusing.
A Woman's Thought
I am a woman—therefore I may not
Call to him, cry to him,
Fly to him,
Bid him delay not!
Then when he comes to me, I must sit quiet;
Still as a stone—
All silent and cold.
If my heart riot—
Crush and defy it!
Should I grow bold,
Say one dear thing to him,
All my life fling to him,
Cling to him—
What to atone
Is enough for my sinning!
This were the cost to me,
This were my winning—
That he were lost to me.
Not as a lover
At last if he part from me,
Tearing my heart from me,
Hurt beyond cure—
Calm and demure
Then must I hold me,
In myself fold me,
Lest he discover;
Showing no sign to him
By look of mine to him
What he has been to me—
How my heart turns to him,
Follows him, yearns to him,
Prays him to love me.
Pity me, lean to me,
Thou God above me!
It's obvious that was written by a man.
Sheesh.
Posted by: annika at
05:24 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 208 words, total size 1 kb.
The DNC's New Attempt To Reach Out To Christians
The Democratic Party
is the party of anti-Christian hatred, their false "inclusiveness" rhetoric at the convention notwithstanding.
On July 23, Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chairman Terry McAuliffe announced the appointment of Rev. Brenda Bartella Peterson as the Senior Advisor for Religious Outreach; she is an ordained minister in the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ).
According to Terry McAuliffe, this woman is supposed to reflect "the DNCÂ’s commitment to reaching all people of faith." He said (presumably with a straight face):
Brenda has dedicated her life to showing us all how religion and politics intersect with integrity . . . We are proud to have her join the DNC, in order to spread John Kerry's positive vision to people of all faiths."
Unfortunately, that's complete bullshit.
Catholic League president, Dr. William Donohue said:
Rev. Brenda Bartella Peterson was one of thirty-two clergy members to file an amicus curiae brief in behalf of Michael Newdow’s attempt to excise the words ‘under God’ from the Pledge of Allegiance. The brief shows infinitely more concern for the sensibilities of atheists like Newdow than it does for the 90 percent of Americans who believe in God. And this is the person the Democrats want to dispatch to meet with the heads of religious organizations? Are they out of their minds? Would they hire a gay basher to reach out to homosexuals? [link omitted]
Now, if you are skeptical,
here's the amicus brief. Her name's right there, on the cover page "As Amici Curiae Supporting Respondent Michael A. Newdow."
Thanks Dems. There should now be no doubt about where you stand.
Link via Bill.
Posted by: annika at
03:35 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 277 words, total size 2 kb.
1
"Would you hire a gay basher to reach out to homosexuals?" I don't think that's a fair analogy, she isn't a "religion basher" she respects the rights of people to pray to a God if they don't wanna. Me too. I always tell people to replace the word God with Allah or Jesus Christ or Buddha (depending on which religion you don't practice) whereever you see it in order to get a feel for what it's like being an athiest. I like that the Dems aren't just willing to reach out to 90 percent, they are going for all 100. Woo.
Posted by: Dawn Summers at August 04, 2004 04:38 PM (sv6oS)
2
Now, Annika, you know full well that you're baiting the Christian left. Plenty of Christians in this country are uncomfortable with the "under God" clause -- certainly the Mennonites and the Episcopalian hierarchy.
The Catholic League speaks for very conservative Catholics (they blast Mahony all the time here in LA, and he's hardly a raving liberal). The fact is, Christians can be found across the political spectrum. Evangelicals (especially black ones) are everywhere, including in the Democratic Part. And we will continue to be there. What it means to be a political Christian is open to debate, and we should debate it -- and fortunately, there is room in both parties for committed Christians.
Posted by: Hugo at August 04, 2004 04:57 PM (ntfdi)
3
Baiting? who me? i don't even like to fish.
i'm not familiar with the Catholic League, Hugo. My first intro to them was this article. However, if they don't like Mahoney, they can't be all that bad.
Posted by: annika at August 04, 2004 05:32 PM (zAOEU)
4
The Rev. Brenda represents a group that is starting to dominate mainline Protestant denominations. They are teaching philosophy of life in their churches as they regard Jesus Christ and the Bible as too judgmental.
Posted by: Jake at August 05, 2004 07:06 AM (h4tU8)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
A Pull Quote From Ron Reagan's Speech
Regarding stem cell research, at the Democratic Convention, Ron Reagan said:
[I]t does not follow that the theology of a few should be allowed to forestall the health and well-being of the many. And how can we affirm life if we abandon those whose own lives are so desperately at risk?
It is a hallmark of human intelligence that we are able to make distinctions. Yes, these cells could theoretically have the potential, under very different circumstances, to develop into human beings — that potential is where their magic lies. But they are not, in and of themselves, human beings. They have no fingers and toes, no brain or spinal cord. They have no thoughts, no fears. They feel no pain. Surely we can distinguish between these undifferentiated cells multiplying in a tissue culture and a living, breathing person — parent, a spouse, a child.
Moral relativism at its finest.
But Ron, you failed to directly answer the central question. The one question that must be answered before anyone goes tinkering around in this area. The most important question of all: Is it a human life?
Posted by: annika at
09:31 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 198 words, total size 1 kb.
1
RR's statement of "the theology of a few" is bizarre. A few? What country does he think he lives in?
Posted by: Nice Guy Eddie at August 04, 2004 01:50 PM (gNmoD)
2
i think he's saying that if it has no human body, no human nervous system, no human biostasis... that it's not a living human.
if it's not a living human, then it's not a human life.
i believe the logical syllogism is:
only living humans (i.e. entities which have...[see list above]) have human life.
this stem cell is not a living human.
therefore, this is not a human life.
this is the same syllogism that is used to justify abortion, of course. in the case of abortion, the problem arises in deciding when dividing cells reach a point where they constitute a human body.
Posted by: wegglywoo at August 04, 2004 04:48 PM (seI9v)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
August 03, 2004
Come On - He's Not That Hot!
The Kerry sisters are apparently all lubricated over that has-been-never-was actor
Matt Ben Afflack. (Apparently, they never saw
Daredevil, which can cure any starstruck Afflack worshiper of their unfortunate condition.)
The felling seems mutual, as Ben is probably seeing Benjamins in the eyes of the two ketchup queens. Or maybe he's simply all ga-ga over Alex's ta-tas. Or, perhaps most likely, he envisions himself as the next Peter Lawford or Arnold Schwarzenegger, and plans to make the leap from entertainment to the world of power politics via strategic marriage.
Here's a window into Ben Afflack's idea of wit and charm, for what it's worth:
In the new issue of Harper's Bazaar, Ben blathers that he finds the sisters 'funny,' 'smart' and 'absurdly beautiful.'
Affleck, who interviews the duo for the maggie, admires Alexandra's 'soft features, brown hair and a gentle, willowy carriage that complements her demeanor.'
What demeanor is that? Is it the one where she acts "like a spoiled diva" and demands to be let into an overcrowded club with her and Vanessa's thirty person entourage?
As for Vanessa, he raves: 'She looks, with her flaxen hair, almost like a Nordic milkman's child.'
Gag us.
Indeed! That prose is as turgid as Ben's cock must have been at the convention, when he became the meat in a Kerry girl sandwich.
'Ben and Vanessa were in the front of the box in the external seating . . . He had his mom with him but he and Vanessa were yukking it up. They were laughing and having a good time. Very cozy. They looked like affectionate pals.
'Within 15 minutes, Alexandra waltzes in, she sees them and lunges across the partition to get in between them. She greets Ben with the big hug and kiss. This was clearly making Vanessa very uncomfortable, she would walk away and come back. It was like two junior high school girls vying for his attention. This was clearly a case of sibling rivalry.'
Get over him, girls. He ain't that hot.
Via Son of Nixon.
Posted by: annika at
02:20 PM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 349 words, total size 2 kb.
1
This reminds my rant about Hollywood not making any movies about 9/11-
"Don't you Hollywood guys believe in making money any more? Don't you see value in remaking "The Towering Inferno" with twice the towers and 100 times the plot? Don't you think women want to see Ben Affleck carry his hose up the stairs, save the lives of numerous New Yorkers- then die heroically and tragically, shaking his fist and shouting a defiant oath at Osama Bin Laden as he hugs to a brave young woman? You're dang tootin they do."
http://theendzone.blogspot.com/2004/07/movie-about-courage-of-911-fireman.html
Maybe I was wrong. Maybe women don't care about Ben Affleck and his hose.
Posted by: gcotharn at August 03, 2004 04:26 PM (AaBEz)
2
Annika is absurdly beautiful.
The Kerry girls are homely. (They look too much like their father). But they have used their wealth to good effect to look passable among fire-breathing Democrats.
Posted by: Jake at August 03, 2004 07:44 PM (h4tU8)
3
what did you say after Ta-Ta's??
Posted by: jimi at August 04, 2004 03:34 AM (lN8eP)
4
You know, my boyfriend's mom and I were discussing this, and how he had mentioned he would like to get into politics.
I think I just threw up a little in my mouth.
Anyways, yeah, I totally agree -- he's not all that. Ever since Bennifer, I'm like, who cares about this guy?
Posted by: Amy at August 04, 2004 07:32 AM (RpVKX)
5
re: Vanessa,
If you missed it, check
THIS out!
Posted by: Tuning Spork at August 04, 2004 01:56 PM (fWpcO)
6
A little off topic, but does anyone else think that VS model looks like a female version of Ben Affleck?
http://www.victoriassecret.com/commerce/application/prodDisplay/?namespace=productDisplay&origin=onlineProductDisplay.jsp&event=display&prnbr=MB-171600&cgnbr=OSSALCLOBRA&page=1&cgname=OSSALCLOBRA
Posted by: Key at August 06, 2004 07:45 AM (iuSwR)
7
i don't know that she looks like Ben Afflack at all, but i simply love that tank! In aqua white and/or pink.
Posted by: annika! at August 06, 2004 05:23 PM (xhtSt)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Firefighters, Cops And Regular Guys
From NRO,
a column by a Los Angeles Police officer makes the following points:
[C]ops and firefighters are inherently conservative in that they understand the importance of following society's rules. Unlike John Kerry, they don't find 'nuance' in every question that confronts them. In their daily duties they see the often-deadly consequences that result when people fail to do what society expects of them. Nearly every call to 9-1-1 is the result of someone concluding that these rules, be they the criminal laws or the fire codes, can be ignored. They did a good job of hiding it last week, but the Democrats are the party of libertinism, the price of which is well known to those who come when people call for help.
Second, cops and firefighters are, if the women in the ranks will forgive the expression, Regular Guys. They drink beer, not wine, and certainly not French wine. They played football and baseball in high school, not lacrosse. Regular Guys think Al Sharpton is a fraud and Michael Moore (who pretends to be a Regular Guy) is a fool, and they think Ted Kennedy is a criminal. Regular Guys do not blame Secret Service agents (who are Regular Guys) for knocking them down on the ski slopes, especially when those agents are there to take bullets for them. And Regular Guys relate to and prefer the company of other Regular Guys; they do not invite people like Leonardo DiCaprio and Ben Affleck to their conventions.
Even with the piles of dough they're sitting on, both George Bush and Dick Cheney still come across as Regular Guys, the kind of men you might find hanging around the fire station or the detective squad room. And with his recent suggestion to Pat Leahy on how he might spend his idle time, the vice president climbed several notches on the Regular Guy scale. John Kerry, on the other hand, owing to his valorous service in Vietnam, might have been a Regular Guy years ago, but he surrendered his membership when he came home to join the Jane Fonda crowd and brand his former comrades as war criminals. And whatever tenuous grip he may have had on Regular Guy status since then was lost when he married his current wife. Old-fashioned notions of chivalry prevent me from offering my full opinion on her here, but Regular Guys do not under any circumstances marry women like Teresa Heinz Kerry.
i would only add that John Kerry was never a regular guy, even when he was on that swift boat.
Posted by: annika at
11:26 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 435 words, total size 3 kb.
1
Regular Guys donÂ’t get 3 Purple Hearts for three bandages placed over three scratches. Regular Guys have to spend weeks in a hospital before they get a Purple Heart.
Posted by: Jake at August 03, 2004 12:09 PM (h4tU8)
2
"Unlike John Kerry, they don't find 'nuance' in every question that confronts them"...I think that the kind of work people do has an immense influence on their political and philosophical beliefs. People who work with things that are "real" and inflexible--farmers, machinists, engineers--don't tend to worship nuance. This *doesn't* mean that they don't understand it. An aeronautical engineer knows well that there is no perfectly good design; that there are "shades of gray" and tradeoffs among many factors....but he also knows that at some point the tradeoffs must be resolved, decisions must be made, and metal must be cut. People who spend their entire lives in a purely verbal environment often fail to recognize this.
I think the "lifestyle" factors (beer vs wine, etc) are secondary to this factor.
Posted by: David Foster at August 03, 2004 02:38 PM (XUtCY)
3
I'm a full-time fireman at a fairly large city (250k), and I'm also one of the ones that actually goes into fires. Sadly, my city is one of those liberal stains on the map, and I'd guess a full half of our dept (about 400 FFs) falls into the Kerry column.
Unfortunately, of those voting for Kerry, the overwhelming majority of them are just voting lockstep. Most of them are actually conservative, just as Dunphy implies, but at the same time couldn't imagine voting for Bush. It's a sad reality that the union mentality (or lack thereof) has brainwashed these men.
If these guys (and their civilian counterparts) could resolve the internal conflict of BEING conservative, but THINKING of themselves as democrats, the GOP would win by a landslide. Every time. Only fear mongering and demagoguery keeps the Kerry (or Gore, in the past) troops in line.
As for me, I was a Republican long before I got this job ten years ago, and it never occurred to me to vote the IAFF party line. I even have a "Firefighters for Bush" bumper sticker on my truck. Incidentally, IAFF never inquired as to my party affiliation. Asshats.
Incidentally, regular guy that I am, I can appreciate beer AND wine.
Posted by: Andy at August 03, 2004 09:01 PM (bpH79)
4
Heavens. I am certainly not a regular guy, but I think a lot of any man who is willing to marry a strong, opinionated, spunky woman like THK. In terms of a conversation partner, I'd rather be married to her than Laura Bush (based on what I can tell!)
Posted by: Hugo at August 04, 2004 08:55 AM (ntfdi)
5
"Opinionated" is good, but only when the individual has thought seriously and deeply about their opinions...otherwise, it is just blather. Opinionated human beings--male or female--are not rare at all; what is much rarer is the individual who (a)listens to others and (b)thinks seriously and self-critically about their own opinions.
Posted by: David Foster at August 04, 2004 12:44 PM (E+yz/)
6
I'm sure JK can tap into an infinite supply of patience, understanding and nuance just by thinking fondly of 500+ million dollars.
Posted by: Andy at August 05, 2004 06:54 AM (bpH79)
7
Find the whole truth:
http://www.regularguysforbush.org
http://www.cheesesteakveteransfortruth.org
Posted by: REgular Joe at October 15, 2004 05:58 AM (AaBEz)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Blog Future Feature Failure 1.0
Whatever happened to Rip On Matt Iglesias Week? While doing the research for the upcoming, and feverishly anticipated feature, i discovered that he is actually very boring, despite his impressive credentials. So i lost interest in the idea.
Coming next? A string of teasers related to a blog future feature entitled: Bang On Kevin Drum Week.
Posted by: annika at
09:03 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 66 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Can't wait to read this Annika. I check out Drum frequently and just can't believe people take him seriously. He's the classic know-everything with some conspiracy-driven red-meat snark thrown in for his commentors. What in the hell are his credentials exactly?
I frankly consider him a bit of a coward. He supported the Iraq War initially but once something went wrong, he changed his mind. You just don't do that so quickly if you truly understand what war entails. It is never going to go 100% in your favor.
Posted by: Blake at August 03, 2004 01:38 PM (aCDxI)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
August 02, 2004
A Better Band Of Brothers
On this day, sixty one years ago, the United States Navy motor torpedo boat number 109, commanded by Lieutenant, Junior Grade
John F. Kennedy, was struck and cut in half by the 1750 ton Japanese destroyer
Amagiri.

The PT boat was creeping along to keep the wake and noise to a minimum in order to avoid detection. Around 0200 with Kennedy at the helm, the Japanese destroyer Amagiri traveling at 40 knots cut PT 109 in two in ten seconds. Although the Japanese destroyer had not realized that their ship had struck an enemy vessel, the damage to PT 109 was severe. At the impact, Kennedy was thrown into the cockpit where he landed on his bad back. As Amagiri steamed away, its wake doused the flames on the floating section of PT 109 to which five Americans clung: Kennedy, Thom, and three enlisted men, S1/c Raymond Albert, RM2/c John E. Maguire and QM3/c Edman Edgar Mauer. Kennedy yelled out for others in the water and heard the replies of Ross and five members of the crew, two of which were injured. GM3/c Charles A. Harris had a hurt leg and MoMM1/c Patrick Henry McMahon, the engineer was badly burned. Kennedy swam to these men as Ross and Thom helped the others, MoMM2/c William Johnston, TM2/c Ray L. Starkey, and MoMM1/c Gerald E. Zinser to the remnant of PT 109. Although they were only one hundred yards from the floating piece, in the dark it took Kennedy three hours to tow McMahon and help Harris back to the PT hulk. Unfortunately, TM2/c Andrew Jackson Kirksey and MoMM2/c Harold W. Marney were killed in the collision with Amagiri.
Because the remnant was listing badly and starting to swamp, Kennedy decided to swim for a small island barely visible (actually three miles) to the southeast. Five hours later, all eleven survivors had made it to the island after having spent a total of fifteen hours in the water. Kennedy had given McMahon a life-jacket and had towed him all three miles with the strap of the device in his teeth. After finding no food or water on the island, Kennedy concluded that he should swim the route the PT boats took through Ferguson Passage in hopes of sighting another ship. After Kennedy had no luck, Ross also made an attempt, but saw no one and returned to the island. Ross and Kennedy had spotted another slightly larger island with coconuts to eat and all the men swam there with Kennedy again towing McMahon. Now at their fourth day, Kennedy and Ross made it to Nauru Island and found several natives. Kennedy cut a message on a coconut that read '11 alive native knows posit & reef Nauru Island Kennedy.' He purportedly handed the coconut to one of the natives and said, 'Rendova, Rendova!,' indicating that the coconut should be taken to the PT base on Rendova.
Kennedy and Ross again attempted to look for boats that night with no luck. The next morning the natives returned with food and supplies, as well as a letter from the coastwatcher commander of the New Zealand camp, Lieutenant Arthur Reginald Evans. The message indicated that the natives should return with the American commander, and Kennedy complied immediately. He was greeted warmly and then taken to meet PT 157 which returned to the island and finally rescued the survivors on 8 August.
Kennedy was later awarded the Navy and Marine Corps Medal for his heroics in the rescue of the crew of PT 109, as well as the Purple Heart Medal for injuries sustained in the accident on the night of 1 August 1943.
As you may know, Kennedy never fully recovered from the re-injury to his bad back sustained in the collision. He lived with the constant pain for the rest of his life (with the help of heavy doses of drugs, it has recently been disclosed).
The coconut became a fixture atop his desk in the oval office. The destroyer
Amagiri did not survive the war. She struck a mine and sunk on April 23, 1944.
For a more detailed and prosaic version of the story, here's the transcription of a 1944 article by John Hersey in the New Yorker about the events.
Posted by: annika at
02:12 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 718 words, total size 4 kb.
1
I read in detail years ago the events of PT109. I've always been intrigued by Kennedy, even though I was only 1 year old when he was elected president.
Posted by: Brent at August 02, 2004 05:25 PM (w+y2e)
2
Jeez, almost as big a ton of bullshit as Kerry's three Purple Hearts. Destroyers don't do "40-knots", and any other PT skipper would have stood a courts martial. But few others had fathers who were pals with Henry Luce.
Posted by: Casca at August 02, 2004 09:22 PM (q+PSF)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Hacking Arrested
Maybe i'm getting cynical watching the Scott Peterson
debacle prosecution in progress, but i'm anxious to see how the Salt Lake DA fucks up
this open and shut case.
Posted by: annika at
01:21 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 33 words, total size 1 kb.
1
The smart money says that Mr. Hacking's lawyer advises him to change his name to something a little less incriminating, like maybe "Guiltyassin."
Posted by: Xrlq at August 02, 2004 02:02 PM (585Ar)
2
I want to know how u come up with this stuff. Ur really funny, by the way how old are u?
Posted by: Sierra at May 15, 2005 02:44 PM (rE+Y8)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Artist/War Correspondent
Here's some amazing war reportage from an artist embedded with the 1st Infantry Division in Baqubah, Iraq.
ThereÂ’s a huge bang; the 113 rocks and Ledlow, Cliat and Camp fall to the floor. IÂ’m afraid theyÂ’re dead. An RPG has just hit the side of our vehicle, between Cliat and Gayer, the driver. GayerÂ’s fallen too, and Theis is shouting at him through his headphones to get up. Smoke and the acrid smell of magnesium powder are everywhere.
Doc saw the RPG round fired at us by a man from behind a tree, his head covered in a black hood. Later, he says it looked like a baseball coming straight for us. Pulling himself back up, he locates the shooter in his rifle sight, peering from around the tree. Doc fires off two rounds and sees the man fall, but canÂ’t tell if heÂ’s killed him.
. . .
The RPGs are coming from our left; Ledlow has relieved Camp to defend that side. ThereÂ’s another terrifying explosion against the 113, as a grenade lands low on our left track, damaging but not disabling it. An armor piercing round, it destroys one of the plates, but somehow misses the pin, which would have cut the track and rendered us unable to move. Nevertheless, the sprocket canÂ’t engage and weÂ’ve come to a halt: Gayer canÂ’t get the vehicle to move forward. Theis tells him to reverse it and we lurch backwards.
'What the fuck are you doing?' Cliat shouts at Theis. 'You donÂ’t never go backwards in a firefight! Move this fucking thing forward! Forward!'
Riveting stuff. His watercolors are equally fascinating.
Thanks yet again to Sarah for finding this.
Posted by: annika at
10:55 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 282 words, total size 2 kb.
Breakfast?
Is it wrong to eat the rest of the mint chocolate chip ice cream left over from last week's office baby shower for breakfast?
i think not.
Posted by: annika at
08:44 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 29 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Often, I enjoy a spoonful of ice cream in the morning, straight out of the carton -- the perfect thing to cleanse the palette before breakfast. Starbucks' Java Chip is the perfect flavor, but anything with chocolate is good, too.
Posted by: Eric Johnson at August 02, 2004 09:15 AM (89u3a)
2
Any other flavor would be wrong. Mint chocolate chip, however, is permissable at any hour.
Posted by: Hugo at August 02, 2004 11:08 AM (LLKLQ)
3
Totally acceptable! Especially if it was Breyer's -- it's all natural. Practically health food.
Posted by: ginger at August 02, 2004 11:43 AM (BgaW7)
4
This was Tillamook's Chocolate Chip Mint, very yummy!
Posted by: annika! at August 02, 2004 03:54 PM (zAOEU)
Posted by: Sara B Sterling at November 06, 2004 12:18 AM (WgEFB)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 30, 2004
Happy Birthday Governor Schwarzenegger!
And congratulations on the Wiener-stempel!
Posted by: annika at
02:34 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 13 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I should have known he was a Leo.
You know, my father is from Austria; I'm uncertain whether it is a blessing or a curse that our governor is by far the most famous Austrian alive...
Posted by: Hugo Schwyzer at July 30, 2004 06:02 PM (LLKLQ)
2
Unfortunately, he's not the most famous Austrian, though...
Posted by: annika! at July 30, 2004 08:16 PM (GjLGO)
3
Why does this stamp freaks me out?
Posted by: Dex at July 30, 2004 08:41 PM (Tm98h)
4
Why its like a nightmare of Jack Layton and the whole liberal party in charge of defense of the States. Iam afraid.
Posted by: Dex at July 30, 2004 08:43 PM (Tm98h)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Bat Update
i got the details on bat risk. It's not dangerous to touch a dead bat, but you shouldn't do it. If you see a bat in the daytime, and it's crawling on the ground, something's wrong. It probably has rabies so don't mess with it, it may bite you and then you're in trouble. You can get rabies if bat saliva gets in your eyes, nose, mouth or a wound. In other words, don't make out with the bat.
The source for this info is here, in case you're interested. i also learned that many young bats are unable to fly during summer. So it's possible that i simply saw a lost, but undiseased, young bat.
Here's the proper way to capture a bat:
What you will need:- leatherwork gloves (put them on)
- small box or coffee can
- piece of cardboard
- tape
When the bat lands, approach it slowly, while wearing the gloves, and place the box or coffee can over it. Slide the cardboard under the container to trap the bat inside. Tape the cardboard to the container securely, and punch small holes in the cardboard, allowing the bat to breathe. Contact your health department or animal-control authority to make arrangements for rabies testing.
If you see a bat in your home and you are sure no human or pet exposure has occurred, confine the bat to a room by closing all doors and windows leading out of the room except those to the outside. The bat will probably leave soon. If not, it can be caught, as described and released outdoors away from people and pets.
Not that anyone would ever need to know that, but hey, it never hurts to be prepared. Might as well assemble your bat capture kit this weekend and keep it handy, just in case.
Posted by: annika at
01:26 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 302 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Or, you might just call Batman to take care of the situation, as he is likely the best man for this particular job, wouldn't you say?
Posted by: Tiger at July 31, 2004 09:11 PM (G5PGV)
2
I don't know why, but your posting struck a chord with me, resulting in the following advice
-------------------------------------------------
I got the details on the Trans-National Progressive risk. It's not dangerous to touch a dead Progressive, but you shouldn't do it. If you see a Progressive in the daytime, and it's talking about American values, something's wrong. It probably has rabies so don't mess with it, it may bite you and then you'll become one yourself. You can get rabies if a Progressive's saliva gets in your eyes, nose, mouth or a wound. In other words, don't make out with a Progressive.
I also learned that many young Progressives are unable to work during summer. So it's possible that i simply saw a lost, but undiseased, young Progressive.
Here's the proper way to capture a Progressive:
What you will need:
leatherwork gloves (put them on)
appliance box
piece of cardboard
tape
When the Progressive approaches you with campain literature, approach it slowly, while wearing the gloves, and place the appliance box over it. Slide the cardboard under the box to trap the Progressive inside. Tape the cardboard to the container securely, and punch small holes in the cardboard, allowing the Progressive to breathe. Contact your health department or Progressive-control authority to make arrangements for rabies testing.
If you see a Progressive in your home and you are sure no human or pet exposure has occurred, confine the Progressive to a room by closing all doors and windows leading out of the room except those to the outside. The Progressive will probably leave soon. If not, it can be caught, as described and released outdoors away from people and pets.
Not that anyone would ever need to know that, but hey, it never hurts to be prepared. Might as well assemble your Progressive capture kit this weekend and keep it handy, just in case.
Posted by: Allen at August 02, 2004 07:29 AM (Z8wfe)
Posted by: The Agnostic at August 02, 2004 03:39 PM (BAPix)
4
Tiger, the only one i think might be better would be Dracula.
Posted by: annika! at August 02, 2004 09:43 PM (ft2jf)
5
That was funny Allen. i tried it myself. Here goes:
CanÂ’t we live with a few liberals?
Perhaps they donÂ’t digust or embarrass you, but there are good reasons to exclude liberals from your home. A liberal will travel through many types of waste, then walk over and defecate on your kitchen counters, plates, silverware, and any accessible food. Liberals are known to carry disease-causing bacteria, although their ability to transmit diseases to humans is under study. TheyÂ’re still a significant health concern because they trigger allergies that contribute to asthma.
Finding even one liberal warrants alertness. All liberal problems start small, but liberals reproduce rapidly, so early intervention is highly recommended.
To quickly reduce the liberal population, vacuum them with the hose attachment, preferably using a machine equipped with an anti-liberal filter. As soon as youÂ’re done, remove the vacuum bag and quickly seal it inside another bag, then dispose of both bags.
Posted by: annika! at August 02, 2004 09:57 PM (ft2jf)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 29, 2004
Democratic Finale, Final Thoughts
. . . Something is terribly wrong with the way we teach history in this country when Max Cleland can mispronounce the name of Crispus Attucks and yet be interrupted by applause, while the crowd sits on their hands after he invokes the name of Paul Revere in the very next sentence . . .
. . . Kerry saved a hamster? LOL, now we know why Richard Gere is supporting him . . .
. . . Kerry's daughter was allowed to broach the subject of abortion, because she represents a democratic constituency largely made up of one issue voters: single women . . .
. . . "John Kerry reporting for duty?" Puleeeeze! They're laying it on so thick. Someone should have edited that line out of there. It's way too over the top . . .
. . . Kerry's energy is way up. He's been rehearsing. He'll get good reviews for style, simply because many pundits expected a worse delivery . . .
. . . Funny, he implies that the Republicans have taken the flag away from the Democrats as a symbol of patriotism. The way i see it, the Democrats abandoned the flag as a symbol when they became the party of flag burners. This from a guy who threw his medals away . . .
. . . i can't reconcile Kerry's promise to ensure that we have the best equipped military with his vote on the eighty-seven billion. Can you? . . .
. . . Kerry says that America has never fought a war because we wanted to, only because we had to. That is patently and demonstrably false. The most obvious and notable example being the war he will never let us forget he fought in. But also Korea, WWI, The Spanish American War and The Mexican War . . .
. . . The "we are on God's side" jab is getting huge applause. It's a pretty effective rhetorical jab. And a cheap shot. The anti-Christians in the audience are lovin' it . . .
. . . Balloons and confetti. Sammy Hagar is singing "we'll get higher and higher!" Is this a subliminal way of signaling their position on legalization? . . .
. . . It's appropriate that this convention was held at Fleet Center, because if Kerry wins, it's going to feel like we just got one of these . . .
Posted by: annika at
08:00 PM
| Comments (15)
| Add Comment
Post contains 414 words, total size 2 kb.
1
There's some interesting positions between the speeches and the platform.
Edwards: And we will have one clear unmistakable message for al Qaida and the rest of these terrorists. You cannot run. You cannot hide. And we will destroy you.
The platform criticizes Bush for "unilateral preemption" but in the next paragraph states "we will never wait for a green light from abroad when our safety is at stake" {which implies we're not going to be just punitive in response to an attack, but be preemptive before an attack}
Kerry said we'll exhaust all our options but reiterated the point we're not dependent on any other nation or organization to approve the use of force.
I'm sure nobody is under the illusion of how the country uses its special forces and now we'll double that capability..
The platform goes on to say a nuclear-armed Iran is an unacceptable risk to us (and our allies) - so what a happens when Iran backs out of attempts by the international community to monitor and inspect their nuclear program..this is setting up a dilemma unless Kerry thinks "unacceptable risk" and "our safety is at stake" are not equivalent.
I estimate the military spending based on rough Pentagon numbers for the increase in soldiers and Spec Forces and "state of the art" equipment (which I'm assuming means the shortfall in what the services have asked for but were not funded) to be around 15B a year....and that doesn't include the plus ups necessary to enable the Coast Guard (which is under Homeland Defense) or other organizations to secure seaports and borders.
No mention of gun control in the platform while the 2000 one had several paragraphs on that topic..
One very brief mention on abortion rights while the 2000 platform had a lengthy discussion to include a position on ideology any nominee to the SCOTUS would have to have..
This year's platform includes seeking more diverse sources of oil both abroad AND here at home..while the 2000 platform specifically put the veto on ANWR and California coast drilling..
I wondering if some of the delegates thought they were at the wrong convention..
Posted by: Col Steve at July 29, 2004 09:05 PM (DIN0n)
Posted by: Dex at July 29, 2004 10:23 PM (sQs/5)
3
Its impossible to reconcile a lot of things- but especially Kerry's promise to ensure that we have the best equipped military. He has consistently worked to shrink the size of the military and the CIA throughout his Senate career.
Gov Ed Rendell cracked me up with this-
"John Kerry didn't abandon the fight in the Mekong Delta, and he won't abandon the fight now."
When I was a kid, the older teenagers used to try to buy beer at 7/11's. If a clerk questioned their age, their running joke was to pull their shades low and say "Nobody questioned my age in the Mekong Delta."
Posted by: gcotharn at July 29, 2004 11:22 PM (My8fB)
4
Kerry basically said: I've been in a war, I support the successful wars of America's past and I will win this with war and bring along France because of the sheer force of my personality -- which is basically "I'm not Bush". Well John Kerry needs all the Hope he can get. Pretty soon, and pretty clearly, folks will see through the centrist spin to the liberal record, which is the core of Kerry's waffle-shaped heart.
Posted by: Scof at July 30, 2004 01:45 AM (+kSRT)
5
Q: What do pro-abortion activists have in common with their children?
A: They’re both single-issue voters.
Posted by: David Boxenhorn at July 30, 2004 03:19 AM (a6ToG)
6
Col Steve, do you have a link for the platform?
The democratic candidates' sudden shift rightward is notable not only for the obvious reason that their most vocal supporters are so far to the left, but also it signals that their internal polling and focus groups have been telling them what i have always believed: Americans are not as liberal as the press, the universities and the kooky professional protesters would have us believe.
Posted by: annika! at July 30, 2004 09:01 AM (zAOEU)
7
I didn't see the shift to the right, except for a thin veneer of grasping after military credibility. He threw in every leftist platitude from the last 70 years, and a kitchen sink.
This repeated line of his speech inspired me, but not in the way he intended, I'm sure (be sure to follow the link):
"We can do better, America, and help is on the way."
Posted by: John Lanius at July 30, 2004 09:30 AM (Hs4rn)
8
I didn't see it as a shift to the right at all, he continued to reiterate the idea that the role of government shouldn't be to dole out giveaways to wealthy. Obviously, whoever's in office will protect the country from attack, the key is what else are they going to do for us and I think Kerry is the best choice for that.
Posted by: Dawn Summers at July 30, 2004 10:23 AM (HLOeu)
9
Great recap... although Dawn, you clearly weren't watching your coverage on Fox, where the Dems admitted (in not so many words) that it is actually a shift to the right.
Posted by: candace at July 30, 2004 10:47 AM (j/3i4)
10
It's not an actual shift in policy, it's a shift in presentation. And it's not evidenced by addition so much as by subtraction. They didn't talk about stuff that might be scary to swing voters, making it seem like Kerry is more centrist than his voting record shows.
And i disagree that both parties will protect the country equally. Kerry obviously will respond to another terrorist attack, i have no doubt. The difference is GWB is playing on offense, while i think Kerry will emphasize defense.
Posted by: annika! at July 30, 2004 11:40 AM (zAOEU)
11
It is about offense v defense, and its also about a policy of force and strength v a policy of dialogue, trade, and economic incentive. I've posted about it here- http://theendzone.blogspot.com/2004/07/personal-style-part-ii.html
At its very deepest roots, its a disagreement about the nature of the threat, and the disagreement is spiced by differing moral principles.
Posted by: gcotharn at July 30, 2004 12:22 PM (My8fB)
12
Read the 2004 platform (it's in PDF)
http://www.democrats.org/platform/
and then read the 2000 platform
http://www.democrats.org/about/2000platform.html
Yes, Kerry threw in a lot of promises he knows he doesn't control or left unclear how he'll
keep them - not that politicians don't do that, but he mave have difficulty because it's usually the 2d and 3rd tier political appointees that determine both the agenda and the execution of policies in the executive branch organizations and I suspect the majority of those folks would be more to the left than the direction implied by the platform.
These parts of his speech may come back to bite him:
"I ask you to judge me by my record." And after 19 years in the Senate, he lists only 3 items (balanced budget, 100k police initiative, and POW-MIA accounting).
"You don't value families if you force them to take up a collection to buy body armor for a son or daughter in the service"
Yet, I suspect GWB campaign will run those words and right after the fact Kerry voted for the war BUT against the 87B funding bill which included the funding for more soldier body armor and more up-armored HMMWVs.
Or, to see what the GOP may be planning as rebuttal:
http://www.demsextrememakeover.com/072904Kerrymemo.asp
Posted by: Col Steve at July 30, 2004 01:41 PM (DmFF+)
13
I may have said this before, but Kerry has this interesting gap in the biography he presents to the public, and after the convention you would still not know this. It goes: Vietnam hero; Vietnam protester; prosecutor; Senator. Absolutely NEVER any mention of his tenure as Lieutenant Governor under...who was that again? Oh yeah, Mike Dukakis. I suppose that might not exactly the best selling point to middle America, but it's so conspicuous by its absence that I'd say it borders on a lie of omission.
Posted by: Dave J at July 30, 2004 02:24 PM (VThvo)
14
That Fleet thing is pretty funny. I used to work at a drug store and I had to dust the products. It was always funny dusting the enema products.
You make good points. Kerry is just as much as a warmongering slim as your man Bush is. Another vote for Nader from me.
Posted by: fairest at August 01, 2004 08:47 AM (9iOuY)
Posted by: annika at August 02, 2004 08:25 AM (zAOEU)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 28, 2004
Edwards' Speech
Tonight i realized that i could really like John Edwards. Not just because he's a good speaker (not quite as polished as Clinton, but he's getting there), but because
his speech tonight was worthy of a Republican. No really. Change a few details, tone down the "two Americas schtick, and i could totally imagine GWB giving the same speech.
Edwards was patriotic, he praised the sacrifices of our armed forces with sincerity, and he talked about the everyday struggles of the average American without promising a Clintonesque shitload of handouts. His solution to the problem of outsourcing sounded reasonable to me. i liked what i heard. Didn't believe him for a moment. But i liked what i heard.
Edwards' speech was most notable for what was left out. And that got me thinking. Why is everybody applauding and going crazy over him? Perhaps because he's not Bush or Cheney. Because he definitely omitted everything that today's democrat really cares about.
The word "abortion" did not appear, nor did he mention "a woman's right to choose." He never mentioned gay marriage. He never said the Iraq war was a mistake, or that it was illegal, or that we should get out. He never equated Abu Ghraib with Saddam's atrocities. In fact, the most surprising line of the night was this:
And we will have one clear unmistakable message for al Qaida and the rest of these terrorists. You cannot run. You cannot hide. And we will destroy you. [emphasis mine]
Not "stop you," not "hunt you down," not "bring you to justice." He said "destroy." That's real tough talk, and i can do nothing but applaud him for it, even while i seriously doubt Kerry's ability to improve on the strategy we have been pursuing for three years already.
It's real interesting that Edwards would give such a patriotic pro-war speech when, as Peter Comejo pointed out on the Hogue show this morning, ninety five percent of the delegates in the audience are anti-war, think the war was a mistake and want us to get out immediately. Yet they cheered Edwards words as loudly as a bunch of Republicans would. i guess "anyone but Bush" is really all that matters to them. Edwards could have gotten up there and promised to attack France and they would have raised the roof.
Many, i would say most, die-hard modern Democrats are drawn to the party over only a handful of issues. Compassion issues are part of it, like gay marriage and affirmative action. But there's also fear and hatred issues. Fear of losing the ability to have abortions. Hatred of Christianity, traditional Judaism and the standards of behavior those faiths represent.
That's why i can't understand why Edwards would have the audacity to close his speech with the words "Thank you, God bless you and God bless the United States of America!" But i am not surprised to see that the "official" text of the speech on the John Kerry for President website omits the final eight words. The substantial "Newdow wing" of the party might have let that offensive Republican sounding line slide last night, but they certainly wouldn't want it memorialized in print forever.
Update: Don't believe me? Listen to Jonah Goldberg, he saw this coming.
This is the logic of hate. It lets convention delegates who by every measure are far to the left of the mainstream of the Democratic Party, let alone the American public, cheer a candidate who has spent the past few months holding something of a fire sale on Democratic principles. According to a New York Times survey of delegates, 9 out of 10 say they think Iraq was a mistake and 5 out of 6 say the war on terrorism and national security aren't that important; yet Kerry is surrounding himself with soldiers to the point where it wouldn't be shocking if delegates were required to wear camo fatigues. Even Ted Kennedy would be hard-pressed to play a drinking game in which players had to swig every time the words "Vietnam" or "war hero" come up in Democratic speeches.
Kerry's waxing philosophic about how life begins at conception, but the activists still wear abortion-on-demand buttons. And the delegates serve as little more than an infomercial studio audience who applaud on cue, just as they would if Ron Popeil demonstrated how his new gadget makes curly fries in just a few seconds. The point of this Potemkin unity is to seduce moderates and swing voters into believing that Kerry's their guy.
Posted by: annika at
08:32 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 755 words, total size 5 kb.
1
Maybe it was the many times he said "I wanna talk", maybe it was the saturation of populist themes or that hint of grandstanding I hear in the cadence of his speech. Regardless, one thing I am sure of is that John Edwards thinks we're stupid. Last night he gave nearly every inconsistent and ill-thought reason why we should convict Bush, as if the sheer volume of words would be enough. Then he tried to sell some fiction of some hard-up mom out in hard-up America whose husband got sent to hard-up Iraq. I'm sorry but that was a flub and I liked it better anyway when Matthew McConaughey delivered it in A Time To Kill.
Then he ended it all with a meaningless chant of "Hope". The only hope of the DNC delegates is rooted in their dislike of Bush. The hope of the Kerry campaign is that they can pull off appearing centrist despite having one of the most liberal tickets ever. How these hopes bear fruit will reflect just how right John Edwards is about our stupidity.
Posted by: Scof at July 29, 2004 09:35 AM (XCqS+)
2
I don't see how that neo-Bolshevik class warfare, it's hard to get ahead, the government is here to give you a handout crap could be seen as anything other than the tax-and-spend liberalism of the past. He's appalling. He basically says socialist nonsense with a smiley face. There's nothing conservative in his agenda; he thinks the government is there to help people avoid the struggle of living in a competitive economy. Sell that shit in France.
The only thing they really say about the military and foreign policy is they'll give the troops a pay raise and that they'll charm Europe into sending its nonexistent troops to help us. It's like waving a magic wand. These are not at all serious people.
Posted by: roach at July 29, 2004 11:36 AM (DHoAQ)
3
Wrong. Annika. Edwards was a total liberal boob. Sorry, but I'm gonna have to disagree with ya on this one...
Posted by: Jason H. at July 29, 2004 12:02 PM (0pVR8)
4
I agree with roach. These are not serious people. Another thing, the "Two Americas" speech is inherently contradictory. The wealthy keeps the middle-class and poor down? Please. What about Barack Obama? Bill Clinton? And, let's not forget the son of a mill worker (supervisor) by the name of John Edwards. All started relatively poor (if that) and ended up incredibly wealthy. If anything, they should be embracing the can-do spirit of this country, not playing smiley, slick class-warfare.
Posted by: Blake at July 29, 2004 01:03 PM (aCDxI)
5
i should clarify. i didn't say his speech was worthy of a "conservative." i said "Republican" and i meant Republican in the way the GWB understands it, which is basically what a Democrat used to be a few decades ago. That's in addition to the fact that Edwards' speech should not be taken at face value. If elected, Kerry will do just what we conservatives fear he will do. He is a liberal in the worst sense of the word. Edwards was just blowing smoke up the ass of the undecided voters last night.
Posted by: annika at July 29, 2004 01:34 PM (zAOEU)
6
A few decades ago the democrats were Jimmy Carter...
Posted by: Dawn Summers at July 29, 2004 02:00 PM (HLOeu)
7
Heh, even Jimmy Carter ain't what he used to be.
Posted by: annika! at July 29, 2004 02:14 PM (zAOEU)
8
And that's a pretty damning comment: Carter was an unmitigated disaster as president, but he's WAY worse now.
I'm pretty sure you were looking back a bit further than that: the original JFK would have found himself in agreement with or to the right of most of GWB's current positions.
Posted by: Dave J at July 29, 2004 04:16 PM (GEMsk)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Wednesday Is Poetry Day
A history lesson with the poetry this week, because i have chosen a sonnet written by a man who might not be a household name, but perhaps should be.
Not generally remembered for his poetry, the author of this week's poem was better known for his passionate devotion to the abolition of slavery. William Lloyd Garrison (1805-1879) was a firebrand and so uncompromising, he even managed to piss off Frederick Douglass. Here's a typical W. L. Garrison quote:
I do not wish to think, or speak, or write, with moderation. . . . I am in earnest — I will not equivocate — I will not excuse — I will not retreat a single inch — AND I WILL BE HEARD.
Thank goodness he was heard, eventually, though at the time not many seemed to want to listen. Georgia's antebellum House of Representatives even offered a bounty of $5000 for Garrison's capture. He was ahead of his time in many ways.
In speaking engagements and through the Liberator and other publications, Garrison advocated the immediate emancipation of all slaves. This was an unpopular view during the 1830s, even with northerners who were against slavery. What would become of all the freed slaves? Certainly they could not assimilate into American society, they thought. Garrison believed that they could assimilate. He believed that, in time, all blacks would be equal in every way to the country's white citizens. They, too, were Americans and entitled to 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.'
Garrison was also an early advocate of women's rights, and non-violent civil disobedience.
In the following sonnet, you get a pretty good picture of the man's intensity and righteousness.
Liberty for All
THEY tell me, Liberty! that in thy name
I may not plead for all the human race;
That some are born to bondage and disgrace,
Some to a heritage of woe and shame,
And some to power supreme, and glorious fame:
With my whole soul I spurn the doctrine base,
And, as an equal brotherhood, embrace
All people, and for all fair freedom claim!
Know this, O man! whate’er thy earthly fate—
God never made a tyrant nor a slave:
Woe, then, to those who dare to desecrate
His glorious image!—for to all He gave
Eternal rights, which none may violate;
And, by a mighty hand, the oppressed He yet shall save!
It's a basic Italian form sonnet, in spotless iambic pentameter, until the final line, which tripped me up a bit. It reads like there's an extra foot in there, and i had to read the line a few times to figure out the meter. All in all, a decent sonnet from a famous non-poet.
Posted by: annika at
06:02 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 452 words, total size 3 kb.
1
Bracing! Thanks for sharing that.
Posted by: Daniel Lowenberg at July 28, 2004 08:31 PM (AXcBv)
2
Garrison did quite a bit to advance the anti-slavery cause, but he did some damage to it, too. Not only did he favor women's suffrage, his focus wandered off into things like religious reform and vegetarianism. People started wondering why they should listen to him, because they weren't sure they wanted the whole package he was selling.
That's similar to the "mission creep" that affects many advocacy groups today. Just stick to the original reason you were founded, and you stand a much better chance of being effective. Don't try to save the whole world, just part of it.
Posted by: Eric Johnson at July 28, 2004 08:41 PM (svki/)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Why i'm Such A Huge Hugo Schwyzer Fan
This latest post, called
"Waterparks. And the T-Shirt", referring to the abortion t-shirt, is one reason.
It was about 1997 or 1998 when I began to see the most remarkable slogans showing up on the fitted t-shirts of my female students: 'Porn Star'. 'Juicy.' 'Real American Bitch.' 'I Just Slept with your Boyfriend' (I've seen gay men where these too, but I see 'em more often on women; I've seen other verbs besides 'slept' as well.) 'Too Hot to Handle'. 'You Know you Wanna Touch.' . . . I associate all this with the banal and infuriating 'girl power' movement; largely a creation of advertisers, it sold young women a message of empowerment through shock and sexuality. . . .
What I disliked about these shirts was not so much their brazenness as their rank commercialism. Nothing genuinely radical, edgy, or dangerous is sold at Abercrombie and Fitch or Urban Outfitters . . . Newsflash, kiddies: The fact that it horrifies your parents doesn't make it any less a product of the very same corporate America in which your parents are investing. What these places sell is the cleverly marketed opportunity to outrage the older generation while simultaneously offering a superficially feminist message. The message is 'Only a bold, strong, brave young woman who doesn't care about conforming to stereotypes would wear a shirt like this. Thus if you wear this shirt, you bear witness to your fiery, indominatable, wild grrl soul.' Please. What you bear witness to, darlin', is nothing more than your own socially constructed insecurity, and any sensible person over 25 is abundantly aware of that.
Right on!
Posted by: annika at
11:41 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 285 words, total size 2 kb.
HK Speech
Excellent analysis of HK's speech here. She is a very weird lady, and i
do not want her in the White House.
This is clearly a woman who thinks and feels that she is the one paying the bills, so she gets to call the shots. I can imagine that Sen. Kerry has had to put up with a lot of this, but has made his peace with it, considering the financial benefits.
None of the details of her marriage would be of the slightest interest to me or anyone else, if it werenÂ’t for the fact that her husband could well be the next President. A man bought and paid for, with a willful, short-tempered, somewhat angry and defensive, egotistical spouse, one who is used to getting [her] own way whenever she demands it.
. . . She is, in fact, his primary source of his livelihood. Just as we would demand to know about a candidate's job, we deserve to know about Teresa, who pays far more lavishly than any other job Kerry could hold.
DonÂ’t forget that without the loan he took out on the Beacon Hill mansion bought with HER money, his Presidential campaign would have collapsed in late 2003. It was that money alone which kept him going, until Howard Dean imploded in the early primaries. It was precisely this ability to keep campaigning when others had to quit over lack of financing which caused the Democrats to finally turn to him as candidate. You can be certain that Teresa never lets her husband forget that.
Nor should we forget it.
Posted by: annika at
11:15 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 267 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Here are some good comments by Peggy Noonan-
Teresa Heinz Kerry
It was weird that she didn't talk much about her husband--if she doesn't have special insights or stories to share on him who does?--but it was fun when she dealt with her verbal indiscretions by breezily calling herself "opinionated." What saves Mrs. Heinz Kerry is a singularity, an individualism, and a retained femininity. She seems like someone who'd come to your house with homeopathic medicine if you had a sinus infection.
But there's a disconnect. There is about her too an air of grievance--the sighs, the resigned shrugs--as if she feels she has been a victim of unusual suffering. She seems not to have noticed that all her life she has been a child of privilege. It's odd. I wonder sometimes if some liberals have somehow never been told that bad things happen in life, and are constantly perplexed by whatever misfortunes befall them.
Hillary Clinton
was in comparison cold, robotic and too heavily botoxed. At a certain point Botox can become a problem for those in public life. Mrs. Clinton now has to pop her eyes out to show excitement. Worry lines are honorable, and in Mr. Clinton's wife they are understandable. She should keep them. [...]As always she seemed full of certitude and lacking in sincerity.
Posted by: gcotharn at July 30, 2004 12:45 AM (My8fB)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Don Knotts
Don Knotts had a birthday recently (July 21st), which i failed to properly commemorate on this here blog. i referenced him briefly in a short post below, and now i'm going to tell you what his greatest role was.
While a lot of people swear that The Incredible Mr. Limpet is the best Don Knotts movie, i think people who think that are all wet. Knotts excelled at the physical comedy of facial expressions. Limpet was a cartoon, so it by definition cannot be the best DK movie.
The Ghost and Mr. Chicken is a strong contender. Knotts' character is named Luther Heggs, a perfect name for a DK character. i loved the whole scene where he spends the night in the haunted house. Remember the crazy organ music? Knotts was at his shaky best.
i liked The Reluctant Astronaut just a little bit better, partly because i like space movies. This one came out in 1967, at the height of the space race. The premise is typically DK: he gets a job at NASA, tells his family and his girlfriend that he is in astronaut training, when in fact he's just a janitor, hijinks ensue, his family finds out about the charade, they're terribly disappointed, then even though he's Acrophobic, he blunders onto a spaceflight, actually becoming a reluctant astronaut , more hijinks ensue. It's predictable, but still a must see.
i also liked The Apple Dumpling Gang, where DK teams up with Tim Conway as a pair of stereotypically incompetent but loveable bank robbers.
But the funniest Don Knotts movie, in my opinion, is the often overlooked How to Frame a Figg, from 1971. Here's a couple of comments from the IMDB page:
'How to Frame a Figg is a vintage Don Knotts - frenetic, farcical comedy, and features him at the top of his form as the hysterical, cat-on-hot-tin-roof nervous, persecuted civil servant Hollis Figg.'
'If folks were really this stupid I could be the SRW - Supreme Ruler of the World. In this one Knotts plays a dimwitted bean counter for some little jerk water town run by a group of crooked simpletons only slightly brighter than he is. When things appear a bit shaky for the crooks they go for a frame-up of the patsy Figg. Plenty of laughs as Knotts does his usual bumbling, stumbling act. I especially appreciated the extension cord scene; asininity at it's highest level.'
The opening scene with the ambulance is pathetically absurd, but i won't ruin it for you, it's one of my favorite comic scenes ever.
Best Don Knotts movie: How to Frame a Figg. Go rent it tonight and let me know if you agree or disagree.
Posted by: annika at
09:36 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 452 words, total size 3 kb.
1
My favorite was his impersonation of Jimmy Carter at the Democratic National Convention.
Can you believe how much he looked like Jimmy?
Posted by: shelly s. at July 28, 2004 10:38 AM (PcgQk)
2
annika, I'm not sure if I should see in you a kindred spirit (your Don Knotts expertise parallels my Joe Don Baker fanaticism) or be frightened.
Posted by: Victor at July 29, 2004 04:35 AM (L3qPK)
3
Oh gosh! The Apple Dumpling Gang rocked! Of course you can't forget Mr. Furley.
Posted by: Kin at July 29, 2004 05:09 AM (ZQldT)
4
Amazing. I had no idea that Don Knotts had fans under the age of 35. For me, it's a tie between The Ghost and Mr. Chicken and How to Frame a Figg.
One final note: I met Don Knotts once because he used to play the Pro-Am round at the Greater Greensboro Open. Unlike some of the other celebrities, he seemed to appreciate the fans. Of course, it was a one time event for me, so I could be wrong there. Just my opinion, anyway.
Posted by: physics geek at July 29, 2004 08:54 AM (Xvrs7)
5
You hit all his great ones.
Posted by: Ted at July 29, 2004 07:06 PM (ZjSa7)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Dean's Pledge
i would gladly take
Dean Esmay's Pledge, which is to say that, should Kerry be elected this November, partisanship should end at the "water's edge."
How many of you will have the patriotism to say, 'I disagree with many of his policy directions, I do not think he is conducting our foreign policy in the right way, but I will do my best to get behind him and support him until elections come around next time?' . . . even if he does things I disagree with in conducting foreign policy, I will say, 'I respectfully disagree with the President's directions, but I will do my best to express my dissent respectfully and hope that I am mistaken and that he has made the proper decisions after all.'
However, i won't go so far as Esmay and refrain from calling President Kerry a liar, if in fact, he lies. And no one who cares about this country should. Nor can i refuse to call him a traitor, since in my opinion, he became one long ago by his actions upon returning from Vietnam.
Posted by: annika at
09:12 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 185 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Here, here! He is also a self-serving medal hunter whose claims of valor ring false with those who truly sacrificed in that war.
Posted by: Casca at July 28, 2004 10:28 PM (q+PSF)
2
I have some concern that Esmay's pledge is missing the mark. The problem is not that Dems call Bush a liar- it's that they do not substantiate their charges. The problem is not strong language and tough charges about failed policy- the problem is misleading language and unsubstantiated charges about policies which are generally succeeding.
Posted by: gcotharn at July 30, 2004 12:54 AM (My8fB)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 27, 2004
Teddy
Has Ted Kennedy ever spoken one sentence in the last thirty years without fucking up the pronounciation of something in some way?
Has anyone ever accused him of being an idiot for doing so?
Posted by: annika at
08:26 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 36 words, total size 1 kb.
1
You mean, seperately from the zillion other reasons to (correctly) accuse him of being an idiot? Actually, now that you mention it, I'm fairly certain the answer is yes. God, what an asinine schmuck. The man makes me almost terminally embarassed to be from Massachusetts.
Posted by: Dave J at July 27, 2004 09:07 PM (GEMsk)
2
Both excellent questions.
Neither of which would recieve a coherent or polite answer from anyone in Boston at the moment.
Posted by: Mike Jericho at July 28, 2004 12:33 AM (A8Vx4)
3
He's an idiot. I think he accused Tereza HK of being
opinionated (oh sorry, that was actually her
F'ing spouse). The Dems have a dream that someday the people will consider them smart instead of opinionated.
Posted by: d-rod at July 28, 2004 08:16 AM (HAu1f)
4
I think he has "No officer, I haven't been drinking", and "I hope you can swim" down pat.
Posted by: JasonM at July 28, 2004 08:41 PM (JF+E8)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
108kb generated in CPU 0.0888, elapsed 0.212 seconds.
79 queries taking 0.1695 seconds, 275 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.