October 26, 2004
Pop Historian Shows Astounding Lack Of Smarts
Robert Dallek is a popular Democratic leaning historian. Perhaps you've seen his toothy grin on TV. i own
his thick tome on LBJ, but haven't gotten around to reading it yet. In a
column for USA Today, he presents a pretty good recap of electoral history, while exhibiting an astounding lack of analytical ability.
If voters pay as close attention to a president's record as I think they do, Bush will likely sink on Nov. 2. Like Taft, Bush is vulnerable to charges of being in the pockets of corporate interests. Like Hoover, he has presided over an administration that has lost jobs. Not since the Great Depression has any other president had to run on a record of shrinking rather than expanding employment. However mindful he has been about the economic causes of his father's defeat, Bush does not seem well positioned to avoid his father's political fate.
Repeat after me Bob:
"Bush will win re-election. Bush will win re-election." If you start saying it now, you may get used to the idea before it happens next week.
Dallek conveniently cherry-picks his analogies to justify his own wishful thinking, and reveals his typical liberal Democrat myopia:
Like Ford, who unrealistically denied Soviet domination of Eastern Europe, and Carter, who could not manage to rescue American hostages from Tehran or control rising oil prices, Bush's blundering policy in Iraq, alienation of so many other governments and peoples around the globe, and uncertain formula for dealing with terrorists raise doubts about his stewardship of foreign policy, which can work to deny him a second term.
Comparing Bush to Ford or Carter is simply bad historical analysis. Ford lost because of his predecessor, not because of anything he said at the debate. And Carter ran this country's economy into the ground and made the US an international laughing stock. Like it or not, while the US may have lost a few friends around the world under Bush, no one can say we're not respected in a Machiavellian sense. That's just fine with me, and i suspect it's fine with the majority of
American voters too.
i also thought it was funny how Dallek ended his column by hedging his historical bet, with this bit of prospective sour-grapes:
That a president with so questionable a record is still running a competitive race is a little startling. If Bush wins the election, it would seem to represent the triumph of spin politics.
Funny, i might say the same thing if Kerry wins. But since Kerry is
not going to win, i won't have to, lol.
Posted by: annika at
11:00 AM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 439 words, total size 3 kb.
1
As someone who worked as a "reader" for one of his classes at UCLA (where he taught in the early '90s), I don't think "pop historian" is fair. Everyone agrees that his biographies of LBJ are the standard in the business. He is a first-rate scholar and was a marvelous teacher. However, first-rate scholars can long for public acclaim, and in pursuit of that acclaim, often do "dumb down" their message. He's a fine, fine man -- and his written scholarship is far more substantive than his op-ed columns and his tv pronouncements.
Posted by: Hugo at October 26, 2004 12:10 PM (+5Isa)
2
Hugo, you're forgetting
Robert A. Caro, who has written a Proustian three volumes on the life of LBJ -- and he hasn't even started on the presidential years yet! Caro's work
is the standard not only in LBJ scholarship, but arguably sets a standard for all historical biography. i saw him speak on CSPAN and he is amazing. Someday i plan to read his multi-volume biography, though it may take me a year to do it, because i'm fascinated by LBJ. (i've already read Beschloss's stuff, which is very interesting too.)
Anyways, i've no doubt Dallek's a good guy, though wrong about the election. Since i haven't read either, i can't comment on
their disagreements regarding the LBJ legacy. Still, the #1 LBJ scolar today is clearly Caro, based on the depth of his work on the subject.
Posted by: annika at October 26, 2004 01:48 PM (zAOEU)
3
Caro's LBJ tomes are amazing – well-researched, thorough, reasonable, and wonderfully written. I've never been a big fan of LBJ (and still aren't), but after reading Caro's first volume I became obsessed about learning everything I can about this contradictory historical figure. I'm in Austin, so I'm tempted to go down to the LBJ Presidential Library every so often to tell Caro -- in the kindest, gentlest way, of course -- to hurry his slow methodical ass up and not pull a William Manchester on us!
Posted by: Todd at October 26, 2004 03:21 PM (OPYfK)
Posted by: annika at October 26, 2004 04:17 PM (zAOEU)
5
Well, you've got me on Caro. I've never read him, largely because as someone who isn't an Americanist, I felt that one bio of LBJ was sufficient for me. (Now, if we're talking Edward III, that's a different story). And I picked Dallek because I had worked for him, and trusted his scholarship -- and liked his politics.
Posted by: Hugo at October 26, 2004 05:08 PM (+5Isa)
6
LBJ? LBJ!!? Who gives a fuck, really. Teddy Roosevelt's bio by Edmund Morris, now there's a biography to get deep with. What a life. He did more before he was 25 than LBJ can account for, I'll tell ya what.
Posted by: Scof at October 26, 2004 08:10 PM (9lWXc)
7
If biographies are what you like, then Otto Pflanze's "Bismarck and the Development of Germany" Is the best you can get!
Posted by: lawguy at October 26, 2004 10:32 PM (Z+r8N)
8
Sort of what has happened to Paul Krugman.
Biographical discussions aside, what he leaves out is a discussion that, given his "analysis", the competitiveness of the race also must reflect either poorly on the public perception of Senator Kerry's qualification to be President or on the quality of his campaign.
Posted by: Col Steve at October 26, 2004 11:14 PM (0MJte)
9
Caro is an honest historian, but let me save you the weeks it would take to read the three volume set. LBJ was the kind of turd who'd make Clinton smell good. Truth is D presidential candidates pretend to be JFK, while they're really LBJ. When he became President in 1963, LBJ had a personal fortune of over $10 million, and had never worked outside the public sector. His cover story was that Lady Bird had inherited. Well, she did, about $20K with which she bought a radio station, while Lyndon was the Chairman of the FCC oversight committee. If you wanted something from Lyndon, you bought advertising.
Posted by: Casca at October 27, 2004 06:16 PM (cdv3B)
10
I'm glad Hugo stuck up for Dallek. Although like Annika, I' dissing his analysis on the election.
Didn't such a fine historian ever hear of Harry Truman? Truman was a wildly unpopular President in November, 1948, but managed a big win against a complacent Tom Dewey. The economy at that time was in the toilet, the Sovs were on the march, and Truman was still seen as a water boy for Missouri political interests. And yet, he pulled it off with room to spare.
By the way...lots of good historical biographies out there...how about Fleming's three volume bio of George Washington?
Posted by: superhawk at October 28, 2004 03:23 PM (+7VNs)
11
superhawk: Of course, Truman had a real loser for an opponent. But not as bad as Kerry...
Posted by: markm at October 30, 2004 05:37 PM (5nK/L)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Mad About Bush
[i thought Helen Hunt got killed at the Pyongyang Peace Conference. Apparently not.]
What really pisses me off about the new Helen Hunt political TV spot is the arrogant assumption that all single women are lock-step liberals. i can tell you, we are not.
However, i do agree that "We can make the difference. We are the difference." In fact, i think the unholy alliance of media-entertainment-academic elites may be surprised at the difference we make, when women voters help deliver the election to George W. Bush next week. Perhaps very surprised.
While i still think that overall, Kerry will win a majority of the female vote, i don't think it will be by the Clintonian margins Democrats took for granted in the 90's. The Christian Science Monitor noted in September:
Democrats have long held an edge among women voters, a slight majority of the electorate, and grown to count on them to offset the Republicans' persistent advantage among men. Traditionally, women have given extra care to issues that favor Democrats, such as healthcare, education, and Social Security. Now, the war on terror - and the way Bush is playing it - appears to have shifted that calculation somewhat.
'Bush is trying to reassure them on healthcare and education, saying those things are important, but really it's security,' says Democratic pollster Celinda Lake. 'Women give him a 23-point advantage on security, and that's what's really driving their vote.'
Time Magazine originally had the female vote split evenly before the first debate, then gave Kerry
a dubious 14 point post debate bounce among women. A swing like that doesn't seem credible to me, and i'm inclined to believe that the final result will show a pretty striking gain for the GOP among women voters. If anyone has more up-to-date polling info, feel free to let me know in the comments.
Posted by: annika at
12:51 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 300 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Similar vein: just saw Barbara Boxer's campaign ad. Her message for the 21st Century: "I will NOT allow us to go back to the days of back-alley abortions!!!"
Fear-mongering much? I guess this is the issue on which the Woman of Today is going to pick a president in wartime.
Posted by: jeff at October 26, 2004 05:04 PM (Ag7cW)
2
For many naive women it is still a one issue election. But thankfully, not all of us look at everything through the prism of abortion.
Posted by: annika at October 26, 2004 05:08 PM (zAOEU)
3
For some reason I always liked Mad about You, even though Paul Reiser played too much of a whiny bitch for me to take. More and more as the "new media" takes hold, these celebrities and academics and media elites will realize what you and I and many know: we don't give a fuck about their 2 cents.
Posted by: Scof at October 26, 2004 07:59 PM (9lWXc)
4
ARUGH! This annoys the hell out of me too. 4 years ago this single woman voted for the right man, damn it!
Posted by: Jennifer at October 26, 2004 09:03 PM (/NTmN)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
October 25, 2004
Monday Night Football Pick
As a Raider fan (which is tough to be this year), i hate having to pick Denver for tonight's
Broncos vs. Bengals game. i'm looking for a way to justify not doing it.
The Broncos are playing in Cincinnati, and are favored by seven points on the road. They have a five and one record, as opposed to the Bengals' one and four record. Jake Plummer's been decent, with ten touchdowns and an 87.4 rating.
Contrast that with Carson Palmer's stats: four TDs against eight interceptions, with a 59.6 rating. He sucks. But you should already know that, since he went to USC.
So, basically, there is no good reason for me to pick the Bengals tonight. But i will anyway, and hope that Denver wins by less than seven points.
Update: Cincinnati actually created the ilusion of a good team tonight, i was surprised. With tonight's Bengals win, i improved my record to 3 and 3 on the year. (Last week was my bye week, due to the computer glich.)
Posted by: annika at
01:36 PM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 179 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Carson Palmer, wasn't he in a boy band?
Posted by: Casca at October 25, 2004 03:33 PM (cdv3B)
2
Twilight Zone for sports this year for me,Raiders,Roy Jones, Lakers losing, Yankees not in the world series but not really surpised since I had concerns about the pitching all year,so in saying all of that no doubt Denver would win bye more that 10 points.
Posted by: d. at October 25, 2004 03:56 PM (OEF2f)
3
Southern Cal always have a special place in my heart, go Trojans!!
Posted by: Dex at October 25, 2004 03:58 PM (OEF2f)
4
I could stand the Broncos losing tonight if Plummer
scores me enough points to win my FF matchup. But to lose both? Oh, man, did I pick the wrong year to stop drinking...
Posted by: RichieD at October 25, 2004 09:22 PM (ipRpu)
5
Leave it to the Bengals to be unpredictable.
Posted by: d-rod at October 25, 2004 10:13 PM (LTzrk)
6
Sorry Annika. The Broncos just don't have it this year. (Or, pretty much since Elway left) There's always room here on the Patriots bench for you though.
Posted by: Billy D at October 26, 2004 03:38 AM (idoXH)
7
Boy was I wrong on the Monday nite game and that is what you get for picking Denver being a Raider fan.
Posted by: Dex at October 26, 2004 07:25 AM (wsBTC)
Posted by: ken at October 26, 2004 01:22 PM (xD5ND)
9
"He sucks."
It took Palmer less than a year to prove you a fool.
Posted by: Anon at October 13, 2005 08:54 PM (Vpv/S)
Posted by: annika at October 14, 2005 06:51 AM (7tH/9)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
October 24, 2004
Half-Wit, That's All I Ever Heard...
Half-Wit, How I Love To Hate The Word
From Drudge:
Only a couple hundred came out to see Cher Friday night at Miami Beach's CROBAR disco, but that did not stop the legendary diva from issuing an election warning against Republican control.
. . .
Cher warned moveon.org clubgoers to fight Bush, before 'it's too late':
'All the gay guys, all my friends, all my gay friends, you guys you have got to vote, alright? Because it would only be a matter of time before you guys would be so screwed, I cannot tell you. Because, you know, the people, like, in the very right wing of this party, of these Republicans, the very very right wing, the Jerry Falwell element, if they get any more power, you guys are going to be living in some state by yourselves. So, I hate scare tactics, but I really believe that that's true.'
Actually i'm a fan of Cher's, but that's just fucking stupid. She
really believes that that's true?
i never thought i'd hear a celebrity say something more idiotic than Cameroon Diaz telling Ofrah Winfrey's audience "If you think that rape should be legal, then don't vote," but Cher's comment comes pretty close.
Posted by: annika at
08:51 AM
| Comments (12)
| Add Comment
Post contains 221 words, total size 2 kb.
1
I am reminded of Elvis Presley's classic response to a reporter who asked him his opinion as to whether or not we should be in Vietnam; he said "Lady, I'm just an entertainer."
Cameron, Cher, San, Alec, Barbra and a host of other intellectual midgets would be well advised to emulate The King.
Posted by: shelly s. at October 24, 2004 12:14 PM (fLlQ8)
2
Of course, (the activity referred to by Ms Diaz) *was* legal in Saddam's Iraq, when perpetrated by an agent of the government (or also, probably, by Saddam and his sons out for their kind of fun) I don't remember a whole lot of complaints from Hollywood about that situation, though....
The reason for the euphemism is that the comment-screener objected to the word that means (the activity referred to by Ms Diaz) What moron writes the decision rules for these programs?
Posted by: David Foster at October 24, 2004 12:32 PM (DYjwl)
3
Perhaps you don't remember when Sonny Bono, the dipshit's ex, was elected to congress in 1994, thank you Hillary. You certainly don't remember when she dumped him fifteen years earlier. Sonny was the brains of the act. A music industry exec, he made her a star, and when she didn't need him, she kicked him to the curb.
Well, when he became a star in the political world, the dipshit just couldn't keep her mouth shut. Sonny was a classy guy, and recognized the top when he reached it a second time. I recall an interviewer asking him what he thought about dipshit's comment, "Sonny has always been the love of my life". Sonny said, "What can I say? She left me fifteen years ago. I have a beautiful wife, and two lovely children."
In any case, this whacked-out attention whore, and senior citizen is a walking talking geekshow. The end will not be pretty.
Posted by: Casca at October 24, 2004 07:16 PM (cdv3B)
4
Casca, well put.
Simply put, and as Bugs Bunny would say, "What a maroon!"
Posted by: joe at October 25, 2004 04:43 AM (lIZAx)
5
Look, celebs making stupid comments about the government is far preferable to stupid celebs actually IN government: Arnie, Sonny, etc. The majority of American are obviously stupid enough to both take political guidance from entertainers and then elect 'em. This idiocy does a lot to explain why Bush still has a chance of winning this election. I only hope that somehow people wake up and punt Bush's rich ass out of office before he has a chance to further screw up the US.
Kerry went to war, fought, learned something, and has done a tremendous amount for the US in his career. Bush avoided the war, got rich on bad business deals, got appointed by the supreme court and has done more to screw up America than any other president. You and your children are going to be paying for the first four Bush years for a very long time; don't screw it up even more with another four years of deficit spending to finance the rich, bizzare wars that take our eyes off the real problems (Bin Laden is still running around; islamic fundamentalism is stronger than ever, especially in Iraq, thanks to Bush), etc. etc. I don't think Bush is a moron, but he's bad news, vote Kerry.
Posted by: risk at October 25, 2004 11:41 AM (SHmUd)
6
i'm voting for George W. Bush.
And you spelled
bizarre wrong.
Posted by: annika at October 25, 2004 12:53 PM (zAOEU)
7
risk, you're a fucking idiot. Buy a vowel.
Posted by: Casca at October 25, 2004 03:36 PM (cdv3B)
8
Risk:
Don't buy a vowel; just go away. But, befor eyuo do, tear up your ballot. You lack the I.Q. to vote.
Posted by: shelly s. at October 25, 2004 08:19 PM (fLlQ8)
9
I wonder what Cher would look like without eyelids.
Kevin
Posted by: Kevin Kim at October 26, 2004 08:03 AM (4uHYC)
10
That story about Cher & her pathetic turnout is second only to idiot-extraordinaire Rosie O'dumbass and her rally of 38 fellow freaks.
Here
The closer we get to Nov2, the faster the libs will self-destruct.
Posted by: Smacky at October 28, 2004 12:30 AM (cyWwe)
11
Hey Shelby you fucking iggnoramus, you spelled "u" wrong you pittyful dolt, what reason could I have now to lissen to any of your arguments, you stupit, you. If you had any self esteem you would teer up your voter regasstration card. Yous to stupit to vote for Mr. Brush.
Posted by: mikke at October 28, 2004 03:32 PM (0ZdtC)
12
Thank for this great post, i like what you read
Menu Board. Thumbs up, and keep it going!Thanks for sharing I’ll email my friends about this too
LED Billboard. This is a really good read for me, Must admit that you are one of the best bloggers I ever saw
Led Signboard.Thanks for posting this informative article
LED writing board. I look forward to more updates and will be returning.Cheers!
Posted by: Advertising signs at January 21, 2011 03:56 AM (zpIH7)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
October 23, 2004
Shameless Pandering
Here's the very first paragraph you will find on the homepage of the official Kerry website today, which i found insulting:
John Kerry will strengthen and expand the middle class and help working women by strengthening the economy. In todayÂ’s economy, too many hard-working women are falling further and further behind. Instead of offering help, George Bush has turned his back, broken his promises and in some cases, taken no action at all.
This is one reason why Democrats make me queasy. It's never about Americans. It's always about classifications.
Wouldn't strengthening the economy help all Americans, not just "working women?" And wouldn't strengthening the economy help non-working women too? You know, the kind Kerry's wife insulted the other day?
This type of pandering, supposedly directed at me, is a complete turn off. Someone in the campaign reads a poll that says Kerry needs more points from the "working women" category, and so they take out their economy template and plug the words "working women" into it.
i'm sorry, but i don't buy it. i know that a Kerry administration would lose jobs by increasing the minimum wage and increasing taxes on the entrepreneurial class that creates jobs. And i plan to be looking for a job in about three years, just when the effects of a Kerry economic downturn will take effect.
So i don't appreciate the shameless pandering, as if women were all idiots who got all goose pimply, saying: "Oooh Kerry just mentioned our interest group! Isn't he the dreamiest?"
Posted by: annika at
10:25 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 255 words, total size 2 kb.
1
So why is half the country buying this stuff?
Posted by: mark at October 23, 2004 11:03 AM (AO+Ri)
2
It's one of the things that scares me most about Kerry and the kind of thinking he represents...these are people with no concept of America as anything other than a collection of interest groups. It reminds me of the old cartoon showing two guys in a rowboat...as the stern goes down, the guy in the bow says, "Why should I worry? My end's not sinking."
It also reminds me of some of the really dysfunctional teams that have appeared on The Apprentice, in which every possible issue--how to price cleaning products, for example--becomes merely a hammer for one person to beat another over the head with. Such teams tend not to be real successful...
Posted by: David Foster at October 23, 2004 02:58 PM (DYjwl)
3
Good. You're back.
Jason
Austin, Texas
Posted by: Jason H at October 23, 2004 06:07 PM (RMRNe)
4
Kerry keeps talking about the shrinking middle class. He is correct it is actually shrinking.
But the reason the middle class is shrinking is that so many are moving into the upper middle class or the upper class.
The Democrats put women and blacks in the same category. That is, you cannot succeed in life without government help.
It is racism and sexism at its worst.
Posted by: jake at October 23, 2004 07:25 PM (h4tU8)
5
(So i don't appreciate the shameless pandering, as if women were all idiots who got all goose pimply, saying: "Oooh Kerry just mentioned our interest group! Isn't he the dreamiest?")
Alas, for the majority of that demographic, it's true.
Posted by: Casca at October 24, 2004 09:58 AM (cdv3B)
6
"This is one reason why Democrats make me queasy. It's never about Americans. It's always about classifications."
Verily, thats the only way they can get anyone behind thir flimsy policies. They make people think that they either are being shit-on by someone, or that they deserve something that someone else has. So, naturally, they appeal to all the gluts and neurotics.
Nice blog. Keep fightin'.
Posted by: Smacky at October 28, 2004 12:38 AM (cyWwe)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Krauthammer Piece
Charles Krauthammer's latest op-ed contains this thought provoking paragraph:
John Kerry says he wants to 'rejoin the community of nations.' There is no issue on which the United States more consistently fails the global test of international consensus than Israel. In July, the U.N. General Assembly declared Israel's defensive fence illegal by a vote of 150 to 6. In defending Israel, America stood almost alone.
What are Kerry's plans regarding American support for Israel?
Krauthammer has a theory, and it's not very comforting.
Hat tip to commenter Shelly.
Posted by: annika at
10:03 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 90 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Hello. Just stumbled onto your site from rschultz.blogspot.com.
Thought you ought to know that flip flop is at it again. I just saw an ad on tv where Kerry said that GW has not done enough to help Israel. Also said that he fully supported them building the wall. Just a bit unilateral of him, no?
db
Posted by: David at October 25, 2004 11:00 PM (JzKo5)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
October 22, 2004
Annika With The Tongue
Then there's this:
'My friends always said I had an incredibly long tongue - I could make lots of money with it one day,' said Annika.
*coughs*
'I'm just proud that now people everywhere can read about me and my tongue,' she said.
Well, yah. That goes without saying.
'On my first day at school I had to stick my tongue out for everyone.'
But it was worth it, i guess.
Just so you know, different Annika . . .
Via You're Ugly.
Posted by: annika at
02:22 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 86 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Not the part of you that held my interest in any case.
Posted by: Casca at October 22, 2004 03:14 PM (Y671w)
2
I can touch my nose with my tongue (no joke).
I need to make some money ;-)
Posted by: Radical Redneck at October 22, 2004 07:45 PM (VLKuj)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Good Company
Sarah Bernhardt: actress, poet, playwright
Brian Boitano: athlete
Catherine Deneuve: beauty
Joan Fontaine: "Rebecca"
Annette Funicello: Mouseketeer
Jeff Goldblum: fly
Curly Howard: Comedian with a capital C
Alan Ladd, Jr.: mogul
Timothy Leary: shaman
Franz Liszt, virtuoso: maestro
Christopher Lloyd: time traveller, cab driver, klingon
Tony Pierce: celebrity blogger, and deservedly so
Tony Roberts: Woody Allen foil
Shaggy: Jamaican, reggae singer, USMC, Desert Storm veteran
N.C. Wyeth: artist, illustrator
All were born on this date.
Just my way of saying Happy Birthday, Tony!
Posted by: annika at
12:01 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 87 words, total size 1 kb.
October 20, 2004
Two Twins Separated At Birth? Or One Shapeshifter?
Red Sox owner John Henry . . .
. . . and Odo from Deep Space Nine.
It's eerie.
Update: i'm not the only one who's quick with the Sox-Sci-Fi gag.
Posted by: annika at
06:45 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 47 words, total size 1 kb.
1
DS9 didn't really have good writing, prolly because they never boldly went anywhere but stayed on a freakin space station. Kinda reminds me of that Gary Snyder poem below. Anyhow, here's to the redsox and post game nick at night star trek episodes and big fat bowls of green goodness.
Posted by: Focs at October 20, 2004 07:27 PM (rgyBA)
Posted by: Watcher at October 21, 2004 05:59 PM (nNSYr)
3
Oh well: the Cards beat the Astros, so no chance now to put Clemens' head on a pike outside Fenway. Go Sox!!! :-)
Posted by: Dave J at October 21, 2004 07:48 PM (GEMsk)
4
Trek nerds should watch Boston Legal every week to watch Odo and Kirk battling for power.
Posted by: Jim Treacher at October 22, 2004 02:36 AM (FbRWm)
5
That is eeiry AND very funny. LOL
Posted by: michele at October 22, 2004 03:19 PM (ht2RK)
Posted by: ken at October 22, 2004 03:56 PM (xD5ND)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Time Out For Cynicism
i'd like to take time out from my ongoing coverage of
Election-Fest 2004 to submit the following Statement of Undisputed Facts.
If George W. Bush wins, the left will spend the next four years complaining, they will remain as obstructionist as ever, and they will blame everything on Bush.
If John Kerry wins, the left will spend the next four years complaining, they will remain as obstructionist as ever, and they will blame everything on the Republican congress.
We now return you to our regularly scheduled election coverage.
Posted by: annika at
03:41 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 94 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Unless, fingers crossed, there ain't a Republican Congress anymore!!!
Posted by: Dawn Summers at October 21, 2004 05:12 PM (HLOeu)
2
i walked right into that one, lol!
Posted by: annika! at October 21, 2004 05:52 PM (kske/)
3
LMAO!!! Thanks for the first hearty laugh of the day. I needed it!
Posted by: Amy at October 22, 2004 07:33 AM (RpVKX)
4
man that's quote of the month material, there
Posted by: ken at October 22, 2004 03:57 PM (xD5ND)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Wednesday Is Poetry Day
The following poem, by beat poet Gary Snyder, was posted on the inside of a bus i rode this weekend. (The whole "Poetry in Motion" idea is the best thing to happen to public transportation since Wells Fargo invented the stage coach, in my opinion.) i liked it so much, i decided to make it this week's selection:
Why Log Truck Drivers Rise
Earlier Than Students Of Zen
In the high seat, before-dawn dark,
Polished hubs gleam
And the shiny diesel stack
Warms and flutters
Up the Tyler Road grade
To the logging on Poorman creek.
Thirty miles of dust.
There is no other life.
This poem was one of those discoveries where i found myself saying "Yesss, that's it! That's how i want to do it."
It's short, it's not cryptic, and it takes me someplace new in the space of a few lines.
i love the way the little details create a scene that's instantly recognizable, though not overly familiar. Did you notice how the visual picture of the the fluttering diesel stack makes you hear the growl of the truck's engine, without the poet even mentioning the sound?
Writing about poetry is like describing wine. It's so hard to find the right words and the end result always seems meaningless, compared to the original.
Posted by: annika at
11:16 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 225 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Amen, sister! Great choice, and I do understand the frustration of never finding the words you know are just hiding, just out of reach...
Posted by: Hugo at October 20, 2004 10:20 PM (osqa6)
2
"The whole "Poetry in Motion" idea is the best thing to happen to public transportation since Wells Fargo invented the stage coach, in my opinion."
SHIT! And I thought it was the MIle-High Club!!
Posted by: Casca at October 21, 2004 07:34 PM (Y671w)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Gavin Newsom: Sex Symbol
Not much to add to this story. It's pretty freakin' funny as is:
Kimberly Guilfoyle Newsom took the stage at Thursday night's big Empire State Pride Agenda fund-raiser.
Guilfoyle Newsom was a last-minute sub for her husband at the gay rights event, which drew 1,100 guests. By all accounts, Guilfoyle Newsom -- who lives in New York and is a regular on Court TV -- gave an inspired speech.
But what really brought the house down was when she started talking about her hubby.
'I know that many of you wanted to see my husband and some of you had questions out there,' Guilfoyle Newsom said.
'Is he hot? Yeah.
'Is he hung? Yeah.
'Is he (she waved her hand to suggest bisexual)? Not unless you can give a better (she mimicked eating a banana) than me,' Guilfoyle Newsom said.
Clinton and Starr, what hast thou wrought?
From SFGate.
Update: Here, Bill and Gavin seem to disagree on what the definition of "hung" is.
Posted by: annika at
10:20 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 170 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Just when I thought Tereza was the only spousal dingbat in politics.........
Posted by: reagan80 at October 20, 2004 01:00 PM (hlMFQ)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
October 19, 2004
Back Online
Things i've learned after not blogging for over a week:
- The electromagnetic pulse weapon is real.
- The EMP weapon is dangerous.
- It must not be allowed to fall into the wrong hands.
(Okay, there is no EMP device. i just fucked up somehow. Don't even ask.)
After not blogging for over a week, i was also surprised to find that:
- My head did not explode.
- The sun still came up in the morning.
- The Red Sox still found a way to blow it in the post-season.
Oops, maybe my lack of blogging did have a tiny effect on the space-time continuum.
Posted by: annika at
09:21 PM
| Comments (22)
| Add Comment
Post contains 101 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Very glad to see you are back!
Posted by: Daniel at October 19, 2004 09:32 PM (8U+JH)
2
Whaddya mean, blow it? They're
tied 3-3 with the Yanks now. After that, I can almost forgive them for beating out my Angels in the first round. Almost.
Posted by: Xrlq at October 19, 2004 10:11 PM (6DLYC)
3
"The Red Sox still found a way to blow it in the post-season."
Uh, not. Go Sox!!! :-)
Posted by: Dave J at October 19, 2004 10:14 PM (GEMsk)
4
ah yes, but i have a feeling the sun will come up a little brighter tomorrow because you're back. we missed you so much! i started to check a little too often. i didn't realize lack of annika would send me so quickly into withdrawal.
Posted by: candace at October 19, 2004 10:31 PM (1Fs2q)
5
ditto, ditto, ditto - Go Sox!!!
Posted by: d-rod at October 19, 2004 11:06 PM (2ky5M)
6
Yes, it's good to be back. i need to re-calibrate my subtlety meter though.
Xrlq and Dave J: sorry, i was trying to be subtle, perhaps too subtle. You see, they didn't blow it, so the space-time continuum is, well, oh, never mind.
Posted by: annika at October 19, 2004 11:07 PM (CN0in)
7
It's nice to be missed...but nicer to come back.
Hope you got some studying done in the blackout. We are looking for you to edit the Law Review.
Posted by: shelly s. at October 20, 2004 01:54 AM (s6c4t)
8
Hey, I would like to see the underdog win over the Yanks myself, but at least I have one consolation if the Sox lose.........Steinbrenner is pro-Bush.
Posted by: reagan80 at October 20, 2004 04:21 AM (hlMFQ)
Posted by: ginger at October 20, 2004 04:37 AM (Otp/6)
10
Miss Annika,
I'm very glad your back, as no one on the web gives me what you do: Gratuitous Sox talk
Posted by: Publicoa at October 20, 2004 05:40 AM (dZUTp)
11
I was starting to get worried - good to see you back!
Posted by: Lorie at October 20, 2004 06:32 AM (PPPwU)
12
I had to see what candy was ravin bout.
Posted by: Lisa at October 20, 2004 08:33 AM (6VDyk)
13
Oh, heavens to murgatroid, I missed ya.
Posted by: Hugo at October 20, 2004 09:52 AM (6T6+1)
14
SHEWWWWWWWW!
We wuz worried about choo, Miz Annika! (I was beginning to think it was something I said/didn't say. Then I slapped myself because you know, even *I know I ain't THAT important.
Anyway, where was I? Oh. DOLLY DON'T EVER GO AWAY AGAAAAAINNNN...
Posted by: Margi at October 20, 2004 10:16 AM (MAdsZ)
15
ahhhhhhhhhhhhnnika!
Posted by: gcotharn at October 20, 2004 12:04 PM (D2Obq)
16
Ah. Did you mean to insinuate that the Red Sox are so inept that failed even to fail?
Posted by: Xrlq at October 20, 2004 01:21 PM (3AgfD)
17
Don't jump to any conclusions...
http://www.tfd.chalmers.se/~valeri/EMP.html
Posted by: CW at October 20, 2004 08:49 PM (LbgIn)
18
Nice to see you back, Annie! Old Skool and I were exchanging e-mails just today, speculating about what was going on. The leading theory was that after your "butt cleavage" post your super double-secret blogger identity had somehow been compromised at the law school, and you'd decided to pull the plug. Glad we were wrong.
Posted by: Matt at October 20, 2004 09:10 PM (eWM9Y)
19
Ha! my law school is so full of leftwingnuts, i would be very surprised if anyone would read my rightwingnut blog anyways.
Posted by: annika! at October 20, 2004 09:29 PM (FR+UV)
20
Annika!
I missed you! I looked mornfully as often as I could. Now life is good again.
Posted by: Chuck at October 21, 2004 06:58 PM (qYJRO)
21
Believe it or not, one tires of looking at porn 24/7.
Posted by: Casca at October 21, 2004 07:46 PM (Y671w)
22
You're alive! You're alive! I sent out emails, Ted asked at Munuvia, and the two of use were about to send out search rats and rocket drones!
In the event The Worst had happened, I would've kept Poetry Day alive, but I don't think you would've like it. Don't ever leave again.
Posted by: Victor at October 22, 2004 07:57 AM (L3qPK)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
October 11, 2004
The Fantasy Footballer's Dilemma
"Yaaah, go Chris Brown!"
seconds later:
"Yaaah, c'mon Favre!"
i am the John Kerry of football fans.
Posted by: annika at
06:20 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 25 words, total size 1 kb.
1
If Tennessee wins and the total points scored is 53 points or more, I win my office pool this week and emerge from my jealously guarded cellar. So I'm rooting for both offenses, just the Titans a little more. I'm such a slut ...
Posted by: Go 4 TLI (formerly HH in Hollywood) at October 11, 2004 08:03 PM (Ymz1O)
2
Did I say the Titans bye 10, boy was i wrong. he he
Posted by: Dex at October 11, 2004 09:34 PM (XlMU/)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Football Update
Snooze Button Dreams is killing me in Fantasy Football this week. (Good luck on the interview, Jim.) The Raiders sucked again on Sunday. And Saturday, Cal outplayed USC and still lost. Very depressing.
Hey, at least the Niners beat the lowly Cardinals.
Regarding Monday Night Football, i need Chris Brown of the Titans to have a stellar game for my fantasy team. But i actually think that Green Bay will win this one. Green Bay is favored by three points and they're at home.
This is actually a pretty tough game to pick (i'm 2 and 2 on the year with my predictions). Both teams' quarterbacks are hurting, but how can you bet against a Favre led team on Monday Night? Although i also read that Green Bay's center is out, and the replacement is not as good. But i don't know if that's just bad or really bad. (i actually didn't even know what a nosetackle was until Casca told me. i thought nose tackle was when you hung a snap swivel off your nostril piercing.*)
The hardest question for me is, will the Packers cover the spread? i have a sense that the game might be close, but i know that as soon as i say the Packers won't cover, they will. That just seems to be my luck lately. So i'll pick the Packers minus three points.
Update: Chris Brown: 148 yards + 2 TDs. Will it be enough to overtake Snooze Button Dreams though? i'll find out tomorrow. Re: my MNF predictions this year, i don't want to talk about it.
* Ba-dum-bump. That's a little fishing humor for y'all.
Posted by: annika at
07:33 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 278 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Sunday was terrible with the Raiders but Monday nite have to go with the Titans over all physical and mean when they show up. Green Bay offense good but the defense to vanilla. Titans bye 10
Posted by: Dex at October 11, 2004 09:49 AM (XlMU/)
2
Rough loss, annika, especially since it seems Jim isn't paying attention and didn't notice one of his players had a bye and two others didn't play. I lost, too...Philly's bye killed me.
Posted by: Victor at October 11, 2004 09:54 AM (L3qPK)
3
And what really irks me is that i had a chance to trade Trent Green for Edgerrin James before the season started, but i turned it down because i didn't trust Edgerrin's knee. What a bonehead move that was.
Posted by: annika at October 11, 2004 11:26 AM (zAOEU)
4
Jeez, oh well. I'm counting on Brown tonight too, but all I need are 4 pts out of him. After watching the Pack against Indie, I couldn't pick them over anyone. That first quarter was one of the most stupid exhibitions of coaching EVER in the NFL. The Defensive Coordinator had to get burned FOUR times before he changed his gameplan.
Posted by: Casca at October 11, 2004 01:26 PM (Y671w)
5
Annie,
Odd thing about your blog today and yesterday. When I open the main page, it's blank. I had to tool through your archives to get to this page. Just an FYI in case you hadn't heard.
Posted by: physics geek at October 14, 2004 10:05 AM (Xvrs7)
6
Hello folks nice blog youre running
Posted by: lolita at January 19, 2005 05:48 PM (yM4u5)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
October 09, 2004
Beautiful Asymmetry
These two quotes from John Kerry at last night's debate are so beautiful, all i can do is sit back and admire them.
Quote 1:
He's trying to attack me. He wants you to believe that I can't be president. And he's trying to make you believe it because he wants you to think I change my mind. Well, let me tell you straight up: I've never changed my mind about Iraq. I do believe Saddam Hussein was a threat. I always believed he was a threat. Believed it in 1998 when Clinton was president. I wanted to give Clinton the power to use force if necessary.
Quote 2:
I don't think you can just rely on U.N. sanctions [to contain Iran], Randee. But you're absolutely correct, it is a threat, it's a huge threat. And what's interesting is, it's a threat that has grown while the president has been preoccupied with Iraq, where there wasn't a threat.
Kinda takes your breath away don't it?
Via Paul at Wizbang.
Posted by: annika at
06:14 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 169 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I admire Kerry's resolve too.
I held the same position for over 22 minutes. A new record for him.
Posted by: jake at October 09, 2004 10:29 PM (h4tU8)
Posted by: Casca at October 10, 2004 06:33 AM (Y671w)
3
He's always held those positions, both for and against. So, you see, it's true. He's NEVER changed his mind. He's ALWAYS been on BOTH sides.
That's why he could shoot a fleeing man in the back, and burn a village in Vietnam, put himself in for undeserved medals, then pretend to discard them for the values of his higher self. What a man... war hero, and peacenik. I find him revolting, and believe that the majority of American voters will too.
Posted by: Casca at October 10, 2004 06:38 AM (Y671w)
Posted by: Christopher Blosser at October 10, 2004 08:39 PM (tqj0U)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
October 08, 2004
Presidential Debate Notes 2.0
i wanna do this without listening to any of the TV pundits, so my opinion won't be tainted. Which means that i may end up modifying my opinions later after i've taken in the insights of people wiser than i am. Plus, we finished another couple of bottles of that chianti, and i'm on my second glass of Port. So waaatchout!
more...
Posted by: annika at
08:44 PM
| Comments (21)
| Add Comment
Post contains 868 words, total size 6 kb.
1
Nicely said. i agree.
You write all of this after 3 bottles of wine. I am impressed.
Posted by: jake at October 08, 2004 09:31 PM (h4tU8)
2
I think the domestic policy points for Bush (I agree with your point) should be a real concern for the Kerry camp going into the domestic policy debate. I'm sure they thought they had that one in the bag.
Posted by: Kevin at October 08, 2004 09:45 PM (pXwPO)
3
Annika, the Fact is, though Bush gets high marks for foreign policy, it is not his strong point. Kerry has spent his whole life studying foreign policy. Bush was the Governor of a state(though as large as some countries) and always focused on domestic issues. The only reason Bush has received high marks for FP was his Moral clarity and His team! Bush provides the vision the team fills in the rest. On domestic, Bush dealt With them first hand as Gov, he as more experience in that area. That is why I always though the FP parts of the debate would be Bush's weakest and domestics would be his strongest! Kerry really does not have the intellectual foundation in domestic issues like Bush. Bush is more comfortable discussing domestic issues than FP issues. Remember Cheney was chosen for His FP experience to balance out the ticket in 2000!
Posted by: lawguy at October 08, 2004 09:59 PM (LaG4i)
4
i can't disagree with your analysis, lawguy.
Posted by: annika! at October 08, 2004 10:03 PM (Tsclf)
5
Kerry is a one-trick pony, and his bluster is wearing thin.
Posted by: Casca at October 08, 2004 10:23 PM (Y671w)
6
Gibson owns you repuke cunt!
Posted by: Um Yeah at October 08, 2004 10:44 PM (tBOCg)
7
Bush won on everything. I'am bias about America and I don't think Kerry truly believe in the USA no matter what he says. He don't believe in the troops can get the job done, Kerry thinks France and the UN knows what is best and that is all I need to know about the guy, serious does Kerry really seems to be for the country someone answer that one.
Posted by: Dex at October 08, 2004 10:49 PM (rTD+p)
8
Annika:
I tended to see it the same way - the President let Kerry off the hook on the FP side and Kerry was on the defensive/backtracking on the Dom side.
I also fail to see why the President's advisor don't hammer home the point that all the "conditions" Kerry faults the President for in 2002/3 about going to war were satisfied in 1990/1 and he voted against that resolution while he voted for one in 2002.
Also, if "intelligence" is so important to Kerry, why doesn't the President do the 1-2 punch about his votes on the intelligence budget as well as Kerry's attendance at Intelligence committee meetings?
The last question was dumb, but I suspect Kerry thinks the abortion and stem cell questions were slanted against him. Did he tap dance when the President hit him with the votes on parental notification and partial birth?
If I were advising the President, I'd get him to reinforce the point that security underpins everything. He should look the people in the eye and tell them "you know that if you're not safe in your homes, neighborhood, or schools, then your family and your community won't function" - the same is true for the nation." And then have him rattle off "Beirut, TWA, PAN-AM, Berlin disco, Somalia, NYC WTC 93, USS Coles, African embassies, etc..and say our response to those events were tepid and emboldened our enemies that resulted in 9/11...and we're not going back..(which could bring in Kerry's comment about "sensitive", global test, etc..)
I'd really wish someone would ask Kerry exaxtly WHICH countries not in the coalition he expects to join us as a result of his "summit." Having just had a chance to talk with some of my peers at NATO, they are terrified of the prospect of Kerry actually having to "name names." They love the current position of being anti-Bush, but actually fear a Kerry victory - they don't want to participate and Bush gives them an out.
Kerry is now officially on record about taxes, tort reform (wow, did he try to say that fast so nobody heard him), and budget deficit reduction. If he wins, the Rep nominee in 2008 will already have his/her commercials teed up.
I'm also waiting to hear if any mentions the people chosen were almost all white except for the one black woman (maybe I dozed off, but I don't recall any other non-white questioner)..
Posted by: Col Steve at October 08, 2004 11:52 PM (koO9j)
9
Um Yeah: All right! Way to convince conservatives that liberals are rational and not as blinded by anger as they're made out to be!
Congrats,
Kevin
Posted by: Kevin Kim at October 09, 2004 03:39 AM (mu2fq)
10
Kerry looked like an idiot and couldn't stop lying. If Bush owns a timber company, I own fucking General Electric.
Crush Kerry!
Posted by: d-rod at October 09, 2004 07:23 AM (Btejk)
11
I thought that the final question was intended to mean "what are the worst 3 decisions that *you* have ever made," where "you" means Bush or Kerry, as applicable. Kerry chose to interpret it in terms of Bush's decisions, not his own.
Posted by: David Foster at October 09, 2004 07:59 AM (XUtCY)
12
Just checked the transcript, and I guess my interpretation of the question was wrong. I must have been thinking about how the question *should* have been asked.
Posted by: David Foster at October 09, 2004 08:03 AM (XUtCY)
13
Col. Steve, as usual, you make several excellent points. Not the least of which is that our reluctant "allies" really don't want to participate and Bush gives them an out.
Kerry wants us to believe that the force of his personality alone will bring the "allies" to the table. Yet this is a man who is so pompous and unlikeable, that his campaign is hard pressed to find any friends in the Senate, or even going way back to college. People don't like this man one-on-one. As a rule, people like Bush once they meet him. Which underscores the point. Personality is important in diplomacy, but it is not magic. Personality can't make a nation act against what it percieves as its own self interest. And our supposed "allies" still feel that it is not in their self interest to get involved in "America's war." How's Kerry going to change their minds?
And Kerry's "plan" that he referred to dozens of times, consists of these two points only (check the transcript): he will bring the allies to the table, and he will train the Iraqi security forces
faster! So we're supposed to trust him on the basis of those two slim promises?
And what if our "allies" just say no, which they undoubtedly will? i'm not voting for a man who believes the Iraq War has been conducted "all wrong," but his only plan to fix it amounts to training the Iraqis faster.
Posted by: annika! at October 09, 2004 08:15 AM (qP4HR)
14
Kerry is basically arguing that we should elect him because of his diplomatic abilities; ie, his personal selling skills. If I were interviewing someone for an important sales job--and if he were claiming that he could get us into accounts that had previously not been obtainable--I would want to know:
a)What is your previous experience in closing major sales?
b)What ideas do you have for *specifically* how you will sell these accounts? What "benefits" arguments will you make that we have not already made? How will you work the internal politics within these prospects in order to develop advocacy for our products?
Kerry has provided no answers to the above questions.
Posted by: David Foster at October 09, 2004 09:37 AM (XUtCY)
15
whats the differance between a fresh masive peanutt shit and a KKKonservitive?
theres less nuts in the shit and its a hole lot warmer!
BUSH LIED PEOPLE DIED!
Posted by: Um Yeah at October 09, 2004 10:38 AM (B4DzP)
16
Um Yeah, it's funny you mentioned the KKK. If Robert Byrd ever goes against the Demonicrat party line, the media might find out that he was in the Klan or something.........
It's also funny that you brought up massive peanut shit. I'm sure Carter had excreted plenty of those while in office........http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/jc39.html
If my man wins this election, I gotta new slogan.........KERRY TRIED, VOTERS DENIED
Posted by: reagan80 at October 09, 2004 11:47 AM (hlMFQ)
17
AWESOME! CLICK ON MY NAME!
Next time we'll get alot more!
ULULULULULULULULULULULULULULULU
Posted by: Barney Gumble at October 09, 2004 12:41 PM (NJAlF)
18
WTF?!?!
Is Barney G. saying that he's joyous that the "evil joos" were killed in Egypt? Is he saying that he's a terrorist and that he's gonna kill more next time? If that's the case, I hope this happens to you, Mr Grumble..........
http://www.badassmofo.com/funstuff/video/donkey.mpg
Posted by: reagan80 at October 09, 2004 04:49 PM (hlMFQ)
19
Annika...I've linked this, with additional commentary on the Truman thing.
Posted by: David Foster at October 09, 2004 05:30 PM (XUtCY)
20
I don't think Kerry actually believes he can create a larger or stronger coalition, and I don't think he cares at all about that. His position is where it is because that's what his core support wants to hear.
He says whatever he thinks the listener wants to hear. Why should this particular instance be any different?
Posted by: Ted at October 10, 2004 06:47 PM (ZjSa7)
21
Here's one mistake Bush could and should have owned up to: agreeing to a debate moderated by Charles Gibson.
Posted by: Xrlq at October 11, 2004 02:46 PM (b/34x)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Style Fucking Matters
(my open letter to the President)
Dear President Bush,
Have you seen the latest Electoral College map? i took the liberty of turning it into a gif file so i could highlight some important areas of concern for me, and i hope, for you too.
more...
Posted by: annika at
03:34 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 920 words, total size 5 kb.
1
He doesn't seem to be taking your advice. :-(
Posted by: Dave J at October 08, 2004 06:32 PM (GEMsk)
2
Annie:
I am so glad that I do not try cases anymore; if you can be half as good as this letter, you will be in such great demand you'll have trouble taking vacations.
I only hope that The President got to read your blog.
Posted by: shelly s. at October 08, 2004 07:14 PM (s6c4t)
3
Bush kicked ass tonight. You should be happy.
Posted by: jake at October 08, 2004 08:10 PM (h4tU8)
Posted by: candace at October 10, 2004 09:18 PM (AIQSK)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
October 07, 2004
Pre-Apprentice Dinner Menu
i cooked tonight, and there were two requirements: be done in time to watch
The Apprentice, and include the four major food groups. Those food groups being 1) meat, 2) bread, 3) vegetables and 4) alcohol. My roommates don't get enough veggies.
i accomplished this task with the following menu:
- meat stuffed tortellini with my own sauce (leftover)
- Brussels sprouts with mustard-horseradish cream sauce (non-fat)
- crusty romano cheese sourdough rolls
- $5 chianti
Oh sure, at first my roommates turned up their nose at the sight of the Brussels sprouts. But afterwards all three of them pronounced my side dish to be: "okay," which i will translate as a high compliment.
The $5 bottle of chianti was indeed a hit, though.
Posted by: annika at
07:43 PM
| Comments (14)
| Add Comment
Post contains 124 words, total size 1 kb.
1
So, how did you like the show?
Posted by: David Foster at October 07, 2004 08:14 PM (XUtCY)
2
If your roommates said that the Brussels sprouts were ok, your mustard-horseradish cream sauce must be strong enough to take paint off walls.
Posted by: jake at October 07, 2004 08:35 PM (h4tU8)
3
Yah, but it's non-fat.
And Pamela got jobbed.
Posted by: annika at October 07, 2004 09:24 PM (FaOOJ)
4
I love $5 chianti. But those Brussel Sprouts -- girl, you are demented. I don't understand why anyone would consume them voluntarily, even after smothering them in sauce.
Posted by: ginger at October 08, 2004 03:58 AM (Otp/6)
5
Brussel Sprouts... Yummm... I love Brussel Sprouts. But hardly ever eat them as the rest of my family can't stand them.
If you get a second, e-mail me the horseradish sauce receipe. Sounds great.
And to close... When isn't $5 Chianti a hit?
Posted by: The Maximum Leader at October 08, 2004 06:17 AM (jmfvP)
6
Oh, gross. You did *NOT* serve your roommates Brussels sprouts, did you? That is sooo disgusting.
What's next? Liver? Sweetbreads? Calves brains? Coors?
Posted by: victor at October 08, 2004 06:41 AM (L3qPK)
7
I can't think of chianti without thinking of fava beans.
Posted by: Francine at October 08, 2004 09:05 AM (zAOEU)
8
i got the recipe out of Betty Crocker but made my own changes to make it non fat.
First steam or boil the brussels sprouts for ten minutes.
Spray Pam on a non stick skillet, brown a quarter of chopped onion lightly.
in a mixing bowl mix a tblsp of stone ground mustard, a tblsp of horseradish, a half cup of soy milk, a clove of minced garlic, two tblsps of flour a couple of pinches of pepper and a pinch of salt. Mix until the flour's not lumpy.
Then pour the mix into the skillet and simmer until thickened. You can either pour the sauce over the cooked brussels sprouts or dump the sprouts into the sauce, toss and serve.
Posted by: annika! at October 08, 2004 10:31 AM (zAOEU)
9
Changing the subject--check your roster. Your TE is out for the next game.
I'd tell Jim two of his players are out and a third has a bye this week, but he's a Marthat Stewart fan.
Posted by: Victor at October 08, 2004 11:00 AM (L3qPK)
10
Gabbiano is always a good choice, moving up their ranks a few dollars doesn't hurt either, but I have a hard time telling $40 Chianti from $14 - Chianti's supposed to be cheap anyhow, that's its nature.
Posted by: keith in mtn. view at October 08, 2004 11:03 AM (04TFv)
11
Chuh, you oughta try it with MY sauce!
Yeah, I'm a perv. Wanna make something of it?
Posted by: Casca at October 08, 2004 03:46 PM (Y671w)
12
Where'd you get Gabbiano for $5? I think I paid eight or nine bucks the last time I went to the local discount wine warehouse. Not only did I enjoy the wine, but my kids like the knight on the front of the bottle.
Posted by: Eric Johnson at October 09, 2004 07:35 PM (94qKy)
13
Bel Air market. For $5.99, actually. I saw it was over $10 or $11 at Albertson's recently, so that's a pretty good deal.
Posted by: annika at October 11, 2004 11:36 AM (zAOEU)
14
Hmm. I thought things were more expensive in California, but I double-checked here in my local Safeway in Virginia, and it's $9.49. Lucky girl!
Posted by: Eric Johnson at October 21, 2004 07:36 PM (84Org)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
October 06, 2004
Wednesday Is Poetry Day
How different is this war we are fighting now. Compared to wars of the distant past.
Thomas Hardy (1840-192
writes about a once universal irony among soldiers:
'Had he and I but met
By some old ancient inn,
We should have sat us down to wet
Right many a nipperkin!
'But ranged as infantry,
And staring face to face,
I shot at him as he at me,
And killed him in his place.
'I shot him dead because --
Because he was my foe,
Just so: my foe of course he was;
That's clear enough; although
'He thought he'd 'list, perhaps,
Off-hand like -- just as I --
Was out of work -- had sold his traps --
No other reason why.
'Yes; quaint and curious war is!
You shoot a fellow down
You'd treat if met where any bar is,
Or help to half-a-crown.'
In this current war of ours, i doubt you'd find many on our side who'd share Hardy's poignant sentiment.
Posted by: annika at
07:44 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 172 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Nah, these guys are whack jobs. Like the little soldierette prison guard said, "The fuck women for children, and boys for fun".
Posted by: Casca at October 06, 2004 09:55 PM (Y671w)
2
Indeed, the cultural gulf is wider with our current enemy than before. I remember reading this poem in high school in a discussion of the Cold War (which was of course still ongoing), and talking about the humanity of Russian soldiers...
Thanks.
Posted by: Hugo at October 07, 2004 07:14 AM (cbb3w)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
109kb generated in CPU 0.1332, elapsed 0.266 seconds.
79 queries taking 0.1875 seconds, 331 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
