We just ran across these folks: Iraqischools.com, thanks to a guy named Tanker who shot me a note. They have no email address that I could find but I did post a message in their forum. We'd sure like to hook up with them, maybe find some way to help each other or maybe even join forces.
Oh, and get this: The soldier who started their effort goes by the name of "Major Softy." Jeez, can you believe it? I'm already seeing the headline, "Chief Wiggles meets Major Softy." Why not? They're both in Baghdad.
God bless America. :-)
October 31, 2003
Bill Hobbs notes that 1.6 million jobs have been created since George Bush took office in 2001. There are more people working now than have ever worked in America before. Go check his figures if you don't believe it. Furthermore, economist Steven Antler predicts that the jobs-created figure for Bush will probably be around 4 million by this time next year.
As unemployment, which peaked at about six and a half percent (which is pretty moderate by historical standards) has been continually getting better month after month, and as economic growth continues apace, it's going to be harder and harder for people to claim that the economy is in the toilet.
I blame the Bush tax cuts! (Tee hee.)
Seriously: Democrats need a new agenda. Carping about how "tax cuts for the rich" (which the rich haven't even gotten yet) have ruined the economy isn't going to play well for them for much longer. Nor is carping about the deficit, which by historic standards is not particularly bad as a percentage of our overall economy, and can be justified to most people by pointing to the necessities of war. So here's a thought: How about some principled and thoughtful ideas, instead?
By the way, back on December 31, 2001, my lovely wife predicted that the American economy would be booming by September. She's brilliant, ain't she?
As unemployment, which peaked at about six and a half percent (which is pretty moderate by historical standards) has been continually getting better month after month, and as economic growth continues apace, it's going to be harder and harder for people to claim that the economy is in the toilet.
I blame the Bush tax cuts! (Tee hee.)
Seriously: Democrats need a new agenda. Carping about how "tax cuts for the rich" (which the rich haven't even gotten yet) have ruined the economy isn't going to play well for them for much longer. Nor is carping about the deficit, which by historic standards is not particularly bad as a percentage of our overall economy, and can be justified to most people by pointing to the necessities of war. So here's a thought: How about some principled and thoughtful ideas, instead?
By the way, back on December 31, 2001, my lovely wife predicted that the American economy would be booming by September. She's brilliant, ain't she?
The economy grew at a record pace last quarter: 7.2%. Unemployment is still crawling slowly downward. Consumer spending is up, Wall Street is stable, and businesses are investing again.
My guess is that this quarter will probably not have such high growth, but it'll be robust enough. Next January, when even more of the tax cuts fall into place, thus further boosting consumer and business spending, growth will probably surge again. My gut says that by March, unemployment is closer to 5% than to 6%.
My guess is that this quarter will probably not have such high growth, but it'll be robust enough. Next January, when even more of the tax cuts fall into place, thus further boosting consumer and business spending, growth will probably surge again. My gut says that by March, unemployment is closer to 5% than to 6%.
Fox News recently threatened to sue the producers of "The Simpsons". Is it just me, or does it seem like those folks are a little lawsuit-happy?
In fairness, the story's a little skewed, since they could certainly sue the producers of one of their shows, and it would not be "suing themselves." But still, it's a little ridiculous.
In fairness, the story's a little skewed, since they could certainly sue the producers of one of their shows, and it would not be "suing themselves." But still, it's a little ridiculous.
* Update * It turns out that this story is a hoax, and Fox News did not threaten to sue. Update your links everybody. Darn it. That's what I get for not saying "The AP reports" or something like that when I link these things.
Last night, I had my buddy Moe of Occam's Toothbrush over to our house. He's one of my favorite people. I always dig talking to him. I could talk to him for hours--indeed, I often have. A former rabinnical student, the bastard knows a little about everything, and what he doesn't know much about, he's insightful about anyway. Plus he has a great sense of humor.
At some point last night, he said something about my weblog, Dean's World, that made me uncomfortable. He said, "You both overestimate and underestimate the extent of antisemitism in America." I often make jokes about anti-semitism, you see. Mostly out of a desire to mock that which I find repugnant, and also to expose thinking I find stupid and silly (e.g. "Our Zionist masters" and "the wily Joooz"). I also dislike Catholic-bashers, evangelical Christian bashers, muslim bashers, and so on.
I didn't say much about it when he said it, but I've been chewing on it for about 8 hours now. An essay will be forthcoming, methinks. And what will that essay be?
"What a gentile thinks it means to be a Jew."
I'm not sure why I mention this, except to say that he made me think about it. On multiple levels. Especially because it's worthy of more than just casual humor. I'll have an essay forthcoming on the subject soon. It's a serious subject worthy of serious contemplation.
Stay tuned. I hope what I'm chewing on now is worth reading once I write it.
At some point last night, he said something about my weblog, Dean's World, that made me uncomfortable. He said, "You both overestimate and underestimate the extent of antisemitism in America." I often make jokes about anti-semitism, you see. Mostly out of a desire to mock that which I find repugnant, and also to expose thinking I find stupid and silly (e.g. "Our Zionist masters" and "the wily Joooz"). I also dislike Catholic-bashers, evangelical Christian bashers, muslim bashers, and so on.
I didn't say much about it when he said it, but I've been chewing on it for about 8 hours now. An essay will be forthcoming, methinks. And what will that essay be?
"What a gentile thinks it means to be a Jew."
I'm not sure why I mention this, except to say that he made me think about it. On multiple levels. Especially because it's worthy of more than just casual humor. I'll have an essay forthcoming on the subject soon. It's a serious subject worthy of serious contemplation.
Stay tuned. I hope what I'm chewing on now is worth reading once I write it.
Here's a great old-school English word that I think should be re-introduced into the everyday lexicon: Levant, also sometimes referred to as the Levant .
I was recently talking on the phone with my buddy Diana Moon, and I referred to "politics in the Levant." She stopped me and said, "the what?" At first I thought she just didn't know what I meant, so I started to explain it. A learned woman she, she interrupted my explanation. She knew what I meant, she was just a bit startled to hear someone say it out loud. It's a word that one normally only sees in history books and scholarly publications.
What's it mean? Well, it's the region otherwise known as "the Holy Land" or "the Middle East." The American Heritage dictionary defines it as follows:
"The countries bordering on the eastern Mediterranean Sea from Turkey to Egypt."
I pronounce it in a fairly middle-American way: "luh-VANT." A more old-school way to pronounce it would probably be "leh-VAHNT." Either way, it's basically the east-southeast coast of the Mediterranean. A rough map looks like this:
In short, it's what we generally call "the Middle East" or "the Holy Land." Only calling it "the Levant" is a bit more personal and a bit less politically loaded. To me, anyway. Time was, we would have simply called it "Palestine," the old Roman word for the same region. But now if you say "Palestine," it has a far more political meaning, with variations depending on who you're talking to
"Levant." I love that word. For whatever reason, I'd like to see others using it too. It seems to transcend modern politics, and yet to describe the region in a much less impersonal way than "the Middle East."
I was recently talking on the phone with my buddy Diana Moon, and I referred to "politics in the Levant." She stopped me and said, "the what?" At first I thought she just didn't know what I meant, so I started to explain it. A learned woman she, she interrupted my explanation. She knew what I meant, she was just a bit startled to hear someone say it out loud. It's a word that one normally only sees in history books and scholarly publications.
What's it mean? Well, it's the region otherwise known as "the Holy Land" or "the Middle East." The American Heritage dictionary defines it as follows:
"The countries bordering on the eastern Mediterranean Sea from Turkey to Egypt."
I pronounce it in a fairly middle-American way: "luh-VANT." A more old-school way to pronounce it would probably be "leh-VAHNT." Either way, it's basically the east-southeast coast of the Mediterranean. A rough map looks like this:
In short, it's what we generally call "the Middle East" or "the Holy Land." Only calling it "the Levant" is a bit more personal and a bit less politically loaded. To me, anyway. Time was, we would have simply called it "Palestine," the old Roman word for the same region. But now if you say "Palestine," it has a far more political meaning, with variations depending on who you're talking to
"Levant." I love that word. For whatever reason, I'd like to see others using it too. It seems to transcend modern politics, and yet to describe the region in a much less impersonal way than "the Middle East."
Daryl Van Horne: Do you think God knew what He was doing when He created Woman? Huh?
No shit! Because I really wanna know!
Or do you think it was another one of His "minor mistakes?" Like tidal waves, earthquakes? Floods?
You think women aren't like that? S'matter? You don't think God makes mistakes? Of course He does. We all make mistakes. Of course, when we make mistakes they call it "evil." When God makes mistakes, they call it "nature!"
So whaddya think? Women: A mistake? Or did he do it to us ON PURPOSE!?!?
(In case you missed it, this is the "Why women are annoying" thread I promised last week. All are welcome to participate.)
No shit! Because I really wanna know!
Or do you think it was another one of His "minor mistakes?" Like tidal waves, earthquakes? Floods?
You think women aren't like that? S'matter? You don't think God makes mistakes? Of course He does. We all make mistakes. Of course, when we make mistakes they call it "evil." When God makes mistakes, they call it "nature!"
So whaddya think? Women: A mistake? Or did he do it to us ON PURPOSE!?!?
(In case you missed it, this is the "Why women are annoying" thread I promised last week. All are welcome to participate.)
October 30, 2003
Earlier this year, I did an interview with cartoonist Chris Muir of Day By Day cartoon fame. Given that Chris has been in the news lately, I've republished his interview, along with some extra links, over on Blogcritics. Go check it out!
Thomas Friedman, who is I must confess not one of my favorite columnists, observes something today that a lot of us who've been active in promoting the liberation of Iraq have long observed:
You can read the rest in his Iraq Is No Vietnam column today. (You'll have to register with the New York Times site to read it, but it's worth it--the paper's much better these days now that Howell Raines is gone.)
In somewhat-related news, Andrew Sullivan notes still more patently false nonsense from the Bush-bashing left: this time, the notion that "we were told the occupation would be easy." This is utterly false, and those of us who were there and actually remember what was said--and don't have an obsessive need to paint the President as a pathological liar--know it. Sully demonstrates it fairly effectively. It's even more false than the "he said Iraq was an imminent threat" meme, which also needs to be obliterated for the lie that it is.
Have you noticed that these bombers never say what their political agenda is or whom they represent? They don't want Iraqis to know who they really are. A vast majority of Iraqis would reject them, because these bombers either want to restore Baathism or install bin Ladenism.
Let's get real. What the people who blew up the Red Cross and the Iraqi police fear is not that we're going to permanently occupy Iraq. They fear that we're going to permanently change Iraq. The great irony is that the Baathists and Arab dictators are opposing the U.S. in Iraq because — unlike many leftists — they understand exactly what this war is about. They understand that U.S. power is not being used in Iraq for oil, or imperialism, or to shore up a corrupt status quo, as it was in Vietnam and elsewhere in the Arab world during the cold war. They understand that this is the most radical-liberal revolutionary war the U.S. has ever launched — a war of choice to install some democracy in the heart of the Arab-Muslim world.
Most of the troubles we have encountered in Iraq (and will in the future) are not because of "occupation" but because of "empowerment." The U.S. invasion has overturned a whole set of vested interests, particularly those of Iraq's Sunni Baathist establishment, and begun to empower instead a whole new set of actors: Shiites, Kurds, non-Baathist Sunnis, women and locally elected officials and police. The Qaeda nihilists, the Saddamists, and all the Europeans and the Arab autocrats who had a vested interest in the old status quo are threatened by this.
You can read the rest in his Iraq Is No Vietnam column today. (You'll have to register with the New York Times site to read it, but it's worth it--the paper's much better these days now that Howell Raines is gone.)
In somewhat-related news, Andrew Sullivan notes still more patently false nonsense from the Bush-bashing left: this time, the notion that "we were told the occupation would be easy." This is utterly false, and those of us who were there and actually remember what was said--and don't have an obsessive need to paint the President as a pathological liar--know it. Sully demonstrates it fairly effectively. It's even more false than the "he said Iraq was an imminent threat" meme, which also needs to be obliterated for the lie that it is.
Earlier this week, a Red Cross building was attacked in Iraq. This matches the pattern of terrorist attacks in Iraq, almost always against civilian targets. A growing number of Iraqis are angry about this, in part because they feel that Americans aren't doing enough to protect civilian targets, but also because they recognize that most of these terrorist attacks are not being carried out by native Iraqis, but instead by foreigners from places like Syria, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, and Iran--and view with cynicism the "condemnation" of such attacks from leaders in places like Syria.
Here's a telling quote from Zayed Alshalchi, the native Iraqi who runs the Healing Iraq weblog: "I demand that we expel all foreign Arabs from Iraq until further notice. A little firmness is necessary. We can't just sit and wait for the next attacks. Iraq should resign from the Arab League which is just a symposium for dictators. Who the hell needs it anymore? They didn't even officially show sympathy for Iraqis after the attacks. They should be considered the enemy unless they act promptly to secure their borders and ensure that no Mujahedeen sneak through to Iraq daily. They are the ones to blame. We all know they have an interest in keeping up the attacks and the chaos."
Indeed they do.
(Cartoon by the estimable Cox & Forkum.)
Civilians like myself are generally not aware of how radically the military has changed over the last couple of decades. It's much less hierarchical, less command-and-control, than it used to be. Furthermore, while there's still rivalry between the major branches (Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force), it's more friendly than it once was, and they go out of their way to form joint operations. In fact, operations are sometimes referred to as "purple" ops because they involve a blend of all the colors of each service's uniforms.
It's obviously worked very well for them, but I recently came across a new "purple" operation that looks like it may be taking things too far. I dunno, maybe some of you military folks can tell me if I'm wrong.
It's obviously worked very well for them, but I recently came across a new "purple" operation that looks like it may be taking things too far. I dunno, maybe some of you military folks can tell me if I'm wrong.
ABC News has announced that, after exhaustive study using never-before-available tools, that the Warren Commission was correct in all its essentials: Oswald acted alone. There was no one on a grassy knoll, there's no need for a "magic bullet," and there was no coverup.
Also, Jack Ruby appears to have acted completely on his love for President Kennedy, and for no other reason.
I'll probably go out of my way to see their special on the story, set to air on November 20. Although, honestly, it already matches my prejudices, because this is what I've thought for years. I thought that investigators like Gerald Posner pretty much nailed it down, and every serious study I've seen documented in the last year has only confirmed the same thing.
The funny thing to me is just how many people don't want to believe it.
(Via Up For Anything.)
Also, Jack Ruby appears to have acted completely on his love for President Kennedy, and for no other reason.
I'll probably go out of my way to see their special on the story, set to air on November 20. Although, honestly, it already matches my prejudices, because this is what I've thought for years. I thought that investigators like Gerald Posner pretty much nailed it down, and every serious study I've seen documented in the last year has only confirmed the same thing.
The funny thing to me is just how many people don't want to believe it.
(Via Up For Anything.)
We finally got the flyers done--and I'm happy to say they're beautiful. Please feel free to download these, pass 'em out at church, school, work, or wherever you think they'll help:
Color PDF Flyer (Click to download)
Black & White PDF flyer (Click to download)
They look pretty good, don't they?
Color PDF Flyer (Click to download)
Black & White PDF flyer (Click to download)
They look pretty good, don't they?
October 29, 2003
So, in Pennsylvania, some poor schlub was falsly accused of raping a girl. She confessed to making the whole thing up because she was afraid of her mother.
Now here's the interesting thing: the media feels no compunction against publishing the guy's name, but still does not publish the name of his false accuser. Who, at this point, is a confessed criminal, and probably ought to do jail time for her crime, or make some other form of serious restitution.
Ah well. That's the press for you.
(Thanks, Combustible Boy.)
Now here's the interesting thing: the media feels no compunction against publishing the guy's name, but still does not publish the name of his false accuser. Who, at this point, is a confessed criminal, and probably ought to do jail time for her crime, or make some other form of serious restitution.
Ah well. That's the press for you.
(Thanks, Combustible Boy.)
* Update * CJ reports that there's more to the story. So, now I have no idea what to think. Never mind.
Here is a those who have fallen in Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Let us pray that their sacrifice is honored by success in our endeavors to bring peace, freedom, and human rights to that nation--and region.
(Via Ara.)
Let us pray that their sacrifice is honored by success in our endeavors to bring peace, freedom, and human rights to that nation--and region.
(Via Ara.)
Dr. Oscar Biscet, a political dissident in one of Castro's hellish prisons, has a web site devoted to the cause of freedom you should check out.
He recently managed to get published a letter written from his prison cell. I view it as rather remarkable that the Castro regime allowed it to get out. Although Biscet has been the subject of international attention long enough that perhaps Castro's afraid to simply kill him to silence him.
Anyway, near the end of the letter, Biscet says, "o the leaders of the democratic nations of the world, to the North American people, and in particular to the President of the United States, Mr. George W. Bush, we ask only one simple commitment: DO NOT SUPPORT OR PROPOSE A SINGLE SOLUTION OR SETTLELMENT WITH RESPECT TO THE CUBAN NATION WHICH YOU WOULD NOT DEEM ACCEPTABLE FOR YOUR OWN COUNTRY."
I can understand his feelings. It's rather heartbreaking, really. He seems to be saying "no half-measures." As happened in South Africa in the 1980s, he wants full reform of the regime immediately, and nothing less.
I wish I knew how to make it happen for him.
By the way, thanks to Val for pointing this letter out. He's having a discussion of the letter that you may want to join in on.
Have you seen the new Collected Miscellany site yet? They're doing some terrific literary review work over there. Go check 'em out.
The New York Observer has a terrifically fair and balanced piece on the current state of Iraq, including the attitudes there. Good quotes:
Go read the whole thing, it's very good.
By the way, I found this via Professor Reynolds, who also notes another bit of trash-reporting by Newsweek, this time dissing Chief Wiggles. Ye Gods.
"This is not the time for the Americans to get out of the country. This is not the time …. Life is better here. Better! A hundred times, life is better." Of all the places to meet an Iraqi doing unpaid public relations for the Bush administration, this one seemed highly unlikely. Ali Al-Shikhly, 50, was pausing on the stairwell of the downtown building where his office is located....
...Of course, I cannot speak for the Iraqis. But after spending four of the past six months talking to Iraqis, I do feel that it is relatively safe to make the following five points:
One, most Iraqis do not want America to leave now or very soon. Two, while it is true that a huge proportion of Iraqis have at least some very negative opinions about the war and life here since, it is also true that a huge proportion of those opinions boil down to anger at the Americans for not being enough of a presence here, not anger at the Americans for being too much of a presence. Three, there is very little to support the notion that Iraqis would be, or feel, notably better off under United Nations occupation than under a United States–led occupation. Four, although the Bush administration should be hung out to dry for whatever it has lied about, it is widely accepted here that various of their pet assertions happen to coincide with the truth. Iraqis do not need Mr. Bush to tell them that most of the troublemakers here are not resistance fighters, but highly paid, often imported thugs; Iraqis have been saying that from the start. Fifth, a steady stream of terrible events has generated a steady stream of legitimately negative news stories about Iraq, the sum effect of which seems to have been to leave the rest of the world with the impression that Iraq now appears in the dictionary next to "unqualified disaster"; that hardly anything is improving here, and that hardly anyone is or feels any better off than he or she did before the war. This impression is false....
....With all of this and more, the pharmacist concurred. "I don’t think we will have a good future when our government is Jewish," said Ahoob. "Jewish and imperialism."
Ahoob Khalil in the pharmacy is as much of an Iraqi as Ali Al-Shikhly from the stairwell. As far as I can tell, his viewpoint is by far the more common, but hers may catch right up.
Go read the whole thing, it's very good.
By the way, I found this via Professor Reynolds, who also notes another bit of trash-reporting by Newsweek, this time dissing Chief Wiggles. Ye Gods.
Blogger Rabbit has the latest Carnival of the Vanities up!
The New York Times magazine has a horrific account of cannibalism in the Congo.
What a horrible, horrible state that continent is in. Nobody seems to know what to do about it, either.
(Thanks Casey.)
What a horrible, horrible state that continent is in. Nobody seems to know what to do about it, either.
(Thanks Casey.)
October 28, 2003
Earlier, I mentioned that we were concerned because a group that none of us had heard of was collecting money for the Iraqi toy drive, in Chief Wiggles' name. We were not angry, but we were worried, because we didn't know who they were or where the money was going.
You always, always, always have to worry when someone says they're collecting money, you know? The internet is a wild and woolly place, and there's any number of people out there who might try to play games. The Spirit of America had a Paypal jar up to collect funds, and we didn't know anything about the money they were collecting!
Now they have, perhaps unfortunately, taken the jar down, and just link to the Operation Give web site. I'm not sure they had to do that, since we're now positive that any money they collected will go to Iraq. But it's cool either way. We don't mind people collecting money, we just want to know what's up!
We've looked into the Spirit of America folks, and talked to them, and obviously I should have been more cautious before I said anything publicly. We have also heard from reputable people (like Michele) who've worked with them and know that they are good people. That being the case, there is absolutely no problem here.
Everything's totally cool now. Spirit of America looks like a great group, and we totally support them. I hope you do too.
(For the record: It's fabulous if anyone wants to raise money for this cause. Fantastic, wonderful! Please do it some more! We absolutely want all the help we can get! We just hope that if you collect money you let us know what you're up to, because it would be terrible if anyone were to use this cause for something illegitimate.)
Seriously, go visit the Spirit of America web page. These guys rock!
You always, always, always have to worry when someone says they're collecting money, you know? The internet is a wild and woolly place, and there's any number of people out there who might try to play games. The Spirit of America had a Paypal jar up to collect funds, and we didn't know anything about the money they were collecting!
Now they have, perhaps unfortunately, taken the jar down, and just link to the Operation Give web site. I'm not sure they had to do that, since we're now positive that any money they collected will go to Iraq. But it's cool either way. We don't mind people collecting money, we just want to know what's up!
We've looked into the Spirit of America folks, and talked to them, and obviously I should have been more cautious before I said anything publicly. We have also heard from reputable people (like Michele) who've worked with them and know that they are good people. That being the case, there is absolutely no problem here.
Everything's totally cool now. Spirit of America looks like a great group, and we totally support them. I hope you do too.
(For the record: It's fabulous if anyone wants to raise money for this cause. Fantastic, wonderful! Please do it some more! We absolutely want all the help we can get! We just hope that if you collect money you let us know what you're up to, because it would be terrible if anyone were to use this cause for something illegitimate.)
Seriously, go visit the Spirit of America web page. These guys rock!
The comparison of Iraq to the "Vietnam quagmire" is utterly inappropriate, on multiple levels. Mrs. du Toit has an excellent discussion on "quagmire" that you really should read.
It's time to take the gloves off, kids. The real war is for hearts and minds here at home, and the enemy is the pernicious pack of lies that Iraq is a "quagmire," that the Iraqis hate us, that our forces are losing, that our casualties are heavy, or that we did this for "imperialist" reasons.
The biggest lie of all? That we went there for the oil.
It's time to stop putting up with this crap. The worst thing that could possibly befall the people of Iraq would be for America to abandon them now. Second worst would be to turn their fates over to that body of thugs, theocrats, and dictators who make up the majority of the United Nations.
It's time to take the gloves off, kids. The real war is for hearts and minds here at home, and the enemy is the pernicious pack of lies that Iraq is a "quagmire," that the Iraqis hate us, that our forces are losing, that our casualties are heavy, or that we did this for "imperialist" reasons.
The biggest lie of all? That we went there for the oil.
It's time to stop putting up with this crap. The worst thing that could possibly befall the people of Iraq would be for America to abandon them now. Second worst would be to turn their fates over to that body of thugs, theocrats, and dictators who make up the majority of the United Nations.
AMCGLTD fact-checks Newsweek.
This is far from the first time these people at Newsweek have been exposed for biased reporting, by the way.
The truth? We're kicking butt and taking names in Iraq, and helping a horribly oppressed people to join the rest of the world in the 21st century--and by any sane measure, the lives if everyday Iraqis are already better than they ever were under Saddam.
Readership and budget of Newsweek: Millions.
Readership and budget of AMCGLTD: probably not quite so much.
Victory: AMCGLTD!
(Via the evil puppy blender)
This is far from the first time these people at Newsweek have been exposed for biased reporting, by the way.
The truth? We're kicking butt and taking names in Iraq, and helping a horribly oppressed people to join the rest of the world in the 21st century--and by any sane measure, the lives if everyday Iraqis are already better than they ever were under Saddam.
Readership and budget of Newsweek: Millions.
Readership and budget of AMCGLTD: probably not quite so much.
Victory: AMCGLTD!
(Via the evil puppy blender)
The folks at the Bush-Cheney 2004 weblog asked me to link this fisking of the Democratic debates by Andrew Sullivan. Well why not? Having watched most of those debates on Sunday I found it spot on. (I confess I lost interest about 2/3rds of the way through, so I might have missed something.)
It remains that there are only two Democrats currently in the race who I could seriously contemplate voting for: Joe Lieberman and Dick Gephardt, and I'll take Lieberman in a heartbeat. Clark is a cipher, and has flip-flopped so often on the war that I cannot at this point support him. Sharpton, as usual, is a cuttingly intelligent, charming, witty, charismatic, and engaging nutjob. Kerry I could never support, and the rest I consider utterly uninteresting and not even worth paying attention to.
Except Howard Dean. He's worth paying attention to, if only because he's got a very good chance of winning. Sadly, the rest of the candidates pretty much gave Howard Dean a pass, when what they should have been doing is savaging that sonofabitch bastard. He may be on the right side of issues like gay marriage (although he didn't used to be) and guns, but on the most important issue of the day (the war), he's utterly wrong. My take: if Dean were the nominee, and Bush died tomorrow, and Republicans dug up the corpse of Thomas Dewey and put it on the ballot, I'd vote Dewey. Ditto if John Kerry were the nominee. Both men want to sell out American security interests (and the Iraqi people, and tiny brave Israel) to that council of dictators and crooks we call the "United Nations."
If either Gephardt or Lieberman are the nominee, I'll think very hard about it, and probably won't make my choice until after both parties' national conventions are over. But if either Howard Dean or John Kerry are the Democratic nominee, I will immediately volunteer for the Bush 2004 campaign, and do everything I can to help Bush win. That's not much of a pledge---I'm leaning hard toward Bush anyway, since I support his agenda on several domestic issues and the all-important issue of the war. So, maybe Dems shouldn't bother with trying to get my vote.
I just wish they would try.
It remains that there are only two Democrats currently in the race who I could seriously contemplate voting for: Joe Lieberman and Dick Gephardt, and I'll take Lieberman in a heartbeat. Clark is a cipher, and has flip-flopped so often on the war that I cannot at this point support him. Sharpton, as usual, is a cuttingly intelligent, charming, witty, charismatic, and engaging nutjob. Kerry I could never support, and the rest I consider utterly uninteresting and not even worth paying attention to.
Except Howard Dean. He's worth paying attention to, if only because he's got a very good chance of winning. Sadly, the rest of the candidates pretty much gave Howard Dean a pass, when what they should have been doing is savaging that sonofabitch bastard. He may be on the right side of issues like gay marriage (although he didn't used to be) and guns, but on the most important issue of the day (the war), he's utterly wrong. My take: if Dean were the nominee, and Bush died tomorrow, and Republicans dug up the corpse of Thomas Dewey and put it on the ballot, I'd vote Dewey. Ditto if John Kerry were the nominee. Both men want to sell out American security interests (and the Iraqi people, and tiny brave Israel) to that council of dictators and crooks we call the "United Nations."
If either Gephardt or Lieberman are the nominee, I'll think very hard about it, and probably won't make my choice until after both parties' national conventions are over. But if either Howard Dean or John Kerry are the Democratic nominee, I will immediately volunteer for the Bush 2004 campaign, and do everything I can to help Bush win. That's not much of a pledge---I'm leaning hard toward Bush anyway, since I support his agenda on several domestic issues and the all-important issue of the war. So, maybe Dems shouldn't bother with trying to get my vote.
I just wish they would try.
Because even Ara thinks it is, and is happy about it too, I'm glad to see.
By the way: I blame the Bush tax cuts!
(Sorry, couldn't help myself.)
By the way: I blame the Bush tax cuts!
(Sorry, couldn't help myself.)
Back in March, I noticed (with more than a touch of schadenfreude) that Gerhard Schroeder was having problems in Germany.
It is with equally childish and immature glee that I note that his problems only worsen as we speak.
I hope we don't have him to kick around much longer.
It is with equally childish and immature glee that I note that his problems only worsen as we speak.
I hope we don't have him to kick around much longer.
So, it appears that the military has finally noticed Chief Wiggles (in some way other than "that guy who got all those packages he wasn't supposed to get"):
Centcom story on Chief Wiggles
Defendamerica.gov story on Chief Wiggles
All right. The brass finally sees that we're doing something good here!
We also made it onto Scarborough Country last night on MSNBC. Did you see us?
You should visit the Operation Give web site, by the way, and let your friends know about it. We could still use your help.
The much-promised flyer for businesses, church groups, etc. should be available soon!
Centcom story on Chief Wiggles
Defendamerica.gov story on Chief Wiggles
All right. The brass finally sees that we're doing something good here!
We also made it onto Scarborough Country last night on MSNBC. Did you see us?
You should visit the Operation Give web site, by the way, and let your friends know about it. We could still use your help.
The much-promised flyer for businesses, church groups, etc. should be available soon!
Those of us who are working on Operation Give are a little concerned. We recently ran across this web site:
http://www.spiritofamerica.net/req_3/request.html
They have a Paypal tip jar up, and we don't know what they're doing with the money.
* Update * I've changed this article because we recently had some very friendly contacts with the Spirit of America folks. We jumped the gun and over-reacted a little. In fact, I should say that *I* over-reacted. From everything we see, Spirit of America is a great group and we support them wholeheartedly.
They had a PayPal collection jar up, and we didn't know what they were doing with the money. We've now talked to them and everything's totally cool.
We just want to know what's up if you're collecting money. It's not a big deal, but please talk to us so we know what you're up to!
In case you missed it, by the way, we're still collecting toys:
Operation Give Warehouse
7155 Columbia Gateway Drive
Columbia, MD 21046
Please let everyone know about it!
http://www.spiritofamerica.net/req_3/request.html
They have a Paypal tip jar up, and we don't know what they're doing with the money.
* Update * I've changed this article because we recently had some very friendly contacts with the Spirit of America folks. We jumped the gun and over-reacted a little. In fact, I should say that *I* over-reacted. From everything we see, Spirit of America is a great group and we support them wholeheartedly.
They had a PayPal collection jar up, and we didn't know what they were doing with the money. We've now talked to them and everything's totally cool.
We just want to know what's up if you're collecting money. It's not a big deal, but please talk to us so we know what you're up to!
In case you missed it, by the way, we're still collecting toys:
Operation Give Warehouse
7155 Columbia Gateway Drive
Columbia, MD 21046
Please let everyone know about it!
My friend Kyle recently told me this joke. Warning: it's a little vulgar.
A pirate walks into a bar. Oddly enough, he has a steering wheel sticking out of the front of his pants.
He waddles uncomfortably up to the bar and orders a beer. Everyone is kind of looking at him. The bartender serves him his beer, and says, "Excuse me sir, I can't help but ask. I notice you have a steering wheel stuck there in front of you. Isn't that kind of uncomfortable?" There's More...
A pirate walks into a bar. Oddly enough, he has a steering wheel sticking out of the front of his pants.
He waddles uncomfortably up to the bar and orders a beer. Everyone is kind of looking at him. The bartender serves him his beer, and says, "Excuse me sir, I can't help but ask. I notice you have a steering wheel stuck there in front of you. Isn't that kind of uncomfortable?" There's More...
Back in March, I posted a minor, off-the-cuff message that mentioned Australia's special military forces. There was nothing to it, really, just a couple of short sentences linking to other articles, mostly humorous stuff. It was one of those toss-off, "here's something funny, go read it" kind of things that webloggers post all the time.
With fascination, I've watched how, over the last 7 months, that one message has garnered a lengthy discussion, mostly by Aussies, about their military special forces. I've completely stepped back, kept out of it, and just watched it happen. If you go read the thread, it's fascinating to see how Australians, most of them folks I've never heard of, have been discussing their military forces. All here on my weblog, and entirely by happenstance.
To be clear, I don't mind a bit. Yes, I'm paying hosting fees and all that, but the cost is trivial, and one of my main objectives with Dean's World has been to garner discussions. You don't have to agree with me on any issue. In fact, I'd be very uncomfortable if everyone agreed with me, because that would indicate that I was probably doing something wrong. But it's funny to me how one random message I posted 7 months ago has, completely spontaneously, generated an ongoing discussion group.
It's not a statement about how cool I am (please, give me a break), but it is a testament to what a wild, crazy place the internet can be.
Weblogs are weird, ain't they?
With fascination, I've watched how, over the last 7 months, that one message has garnered a lengthy discussion, mostly by Aussies, about their military special forces. I've completely stepped back, kept out of it, and just watched it happen. If you go read the thread, it's fascinating to see how Australians, most of them folks I've never heard of, have been discussing their military forces. All here on my weblog, and entirely by happenstance.
To be clear, I don't mind a bit. Yes, I'm paying hosting fees and all that, but the cost is trivial, and one of my main objectives with Dean's World has been to garner discussions. You don't have to agree with me on any issue. In fact, I'd be very uncomfortable if everyone agreed with me, because that would indicate that I was probably doing something wrong. But it's funny to me how one random message I posted 7 months ago has, completely spontaneously, generated an ongoing discussion group.
It's not a statement about how cool I am (please, give me a break), but it is a testament to what a wild, crazy place the internet can be.
Weblogs are weird, ain't they?
October 27, 2003
Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy (D):
The Professor has more you should read.
Ever since we landed in Baghdad yesterday, I've been amazed at the morale of our troops. I talked to one soldier who said even though we haven't found the weapons of mass destruction, he's convinced that we are in Iraq for the right reasons. He felt that the conditions that the people of Iraq were facing under Hussein were so bad, that even being here just to help them free their country was reason enough. I've got a lot of reservations about the run up to the war in Iraq. Poor intelligence, lack of a coherent message from the Administration and a faulty plan for winning the peace are all problems, but seeing our work with my own eyes has been helpful. We're doing a lot of good over here.
The Professor has more you should read.
Two hunters are out in the woods when one of them collapses. He doesn't seem to be breathing and his eyes are glazed. The other guy takes out his phone and calls the emergency services.
He gasps: "My friend is dead! What can I do?" The operator says: "Calm down, I can help. First, let's make sure he's dead." There is a silence, then a gunshot is heard. There's More...
He gasps: "My friend is dead! What can I do?" The operator says: "Calm down, I can help. First, let's make sure he's dead." There is a silence, then a gunshot is heard. There's More...
Spoons reports that The Washington Post recently mislabled Senator Joe Lieberman as Senator John Warner.
Poor, addled Spoons, who noticed the "mistake," has fallen for what is obviously a trap set up by the Zionist puppetmasters who rule the Washington Post with an iron fist. It is clearly an attempt to further confuse those of us who suspect that Lieberman is really Evil Senator Palpatine. Those of us who are hip to the wiley ways of the Jooz will not be distracted, however.
Poor, addled Spoons, who noticed the "mistake," has fallen for what is obviously a trap set up by the Zionist puppetmasters who rule the Washington Post with an iron fist. It is clearly an attempt to further confuse those of us who suspect that Lieberman is really Evil Senator Palpatine. Those of us who are hip to the wiley ways of the Jooz will not be distracted, however.
Is it just me, or does the latest proposal for the U.N. Security Council actually make sense? I'm shaking my head and wondering if I'm missing something.
Some rather horrific fires are burning in Southern California. For detailed first-hand reports and photographs, go read Mrs. du Toit and Citizen Smash. Smash has more photos here.
The new Carnival of the Capitalists is up and awaiting your eager eyes. Time to find out what those moneygrubbing selfish heartless cruel monsters are really saying!
October 26, 2003
George Junior, an American abroad in England, is the latest BlogSpot refugee. Go give him a welcome.
I recently had two conversations that distressed me. In the same day. I have a pretty large number of readers at this point, so I guess nothing should surprise me. But I couldn't help but feel all knotted up inside. Both stories made me turn red in embarassment and anger, in two completely different directions at once.
First, I heard that a Dean's World reader was threatened with an ass-whupping in private email in response to something he said here. The one reader was gay and the other was a fag-basher--you know, a "good Christian." I have absolutely no idea what to say to something like that, except that I find it appalling, and it makes me wonder what kind of person I attract to this weblog. If I ever hear about something like that again, I may disable comments permanently, because if Dean's World is going to make people targets for that kind of abuse, then obviously Dean's World needs to change radically.
But just when I thought I had my head around this, the second story in the same day: a Dean's World reader who read about the Pink Pistols, and who lives in a very left-wing college town, tried to start up a Pink Pistols group. He's not gay, but he's a gun enthusiast who wanted to help gay people learn about self-defense. Posted some signs around town, with his email address, and mentioned it around work. He received tons of nasty personal comments to his face, and email from people calling him a right-wing hatemonger and homophobe, a Nazi, and in some cases threatening to anally rape him. He decided he'd lost interest in helping gay people do anything.
When I hear things like this, I just want to throw away my computer and go live in a log cabin somewhere with a few crates of books. I could spend the rest of my days reading and scribbling in notebooks that I never show to anybody. Either that, or I could just go beat the crap out of several people, left and right alike.
That's rhetoric. I don't hit people. But stuff like this makes me feel like it. It also makes me want to quit blogging entirely. If people are going to be like that... I mean, Jesus. What do you even say in response to stuff like this?
I've had gay friends most of my life. You want to call that sinful because scripture tells you it's sinful, that's just fine, as long as you don't descend into hatred or advocate locking people up or harassing them. You want to be an angry gay who rants at homophobes and thinks America's an opporessive hellhole? That's just fine, but you could have the common human decency to stop thinking that being gay means someone has to toe some gigantic party line on issues like guns, drugs, abortion, taxes, missile defense, or what the hell ever.
What the hell is wrong with people?
First, I heard that a Dean's World reader was threatened with an ass-whupping in private email in response to something he said here. The one reader was gay and the other was a fag-basher--you know, a "good Christian." I have absolutely no idea what to say to something like that, except that I find it appalling, and it makes me wonder what kind of person I attract to this weblog. If I ever hear about something like that again, I may disable comments permanently, because if Dean's World is going to make people targets for that kind of abuse, then obviously Dean's World needs to change radically.
But just when I thought I had my head around this, the second story in the same day: a Dean's World reader who read about the Pink Pistols, and who lives in a very left-wing college town, tried to start up a Pink Pistols group. He's not gay, but he's a gun enthusiast who wanted to help gay people learn about self-defense. Posted some signs around town, with his email address, and mentioned it around work. He received tons of nasty personal comments to his face, and email from people calling him a right-wing hatemonger and homophobe, a Nazi, and in some cases threatening to anally rape him. He decided he'd lost interest in helping gay people do anything.
When I hear things like this, I just want to throw away my computer and go live in a log cabin somewhere with a few crates of books. I could spend the rest of my days reading and scribbling in notebooks that I never show to anybody. Either that, or I could just go beat the crap out of several people, left and right alike.
That's rhetoric. I don't hit people. But stuff like this makes me feel like it. It also makes me want to quit blogging entirely. If people are going to be like that... I mean, Jesus. What do you even say in response to stuff like this?
I've had gay friends most of my life. You want to call that sinful because scripture tells you it's sinful, that's just fine, as long as you don't descend into hatred or advocate locking people up or harassing them. You want to be an angry gay who rants at homophobes and thinks America's an opporessive hellhole? That's just fine, but you could have the common human decency to stop thinking that being gay means someone has to toe some gigantic party line on issues like guns, drugs, abortion, taxes, missile defense, or what the hell ever.
What the hell is wrong with people?
It has been with a greater-than-usual level of frustration that I've noted the sorry state of criticism of the Bush administration over the last six months. But it's been truly deplorable to me. No matter how much information is presented, the meanness and the irrationality of the Bush critics on the war effort only grows to match it.
I suppose that sounds harsh, but that's exactly how I see it. There's nothing rational anymore coming out of most of the administration's war critics. Not that I'm seeing, anyway. Every tiny detail, every slip or inconsistency, is held up as proof of incompetence, stupidity, mendacity, or impending failure. In the meantime, thoughtful suggestions for alternative paths are rarely offered.
That is always, to me, the greatest sign of a political position's weakness: if you're spending all your time criticizing the other bloke's actions, but cannot articulate a clear alternative path that you think would work better, and defend that alternative plan, then you're just a kvetcher at best--or, at worst, someone who is intentionally seeking to sow disunity in a time of war. As such, it all comes across as a clawing, grasping-at-straws desperation that's revolting. There's More...
I suppose that sounds harsh, but that's exactly how I see it. There's nothing rational anymore coming out of most of the administration's war critics. Not that I'm seeing, anyway. Every tiny detail, every slip or inconsistency, is held up as proof of incompetence, stupidity, mendacity, or impending failure. In the meantime, thoughtful suggestions for alternative paths are rarely offered.
That is always, to me, the greatest sign of a political position's weakness: if you're spending all your time criticizing the other bloke's actions, but cannot articulate a clear alternative path that you think would work better, and defend that alternative plan, then you're just a kvetcher at best--or, at worst, someone who is intentionally seeking to sow disunity in a time of war. As such, it all comes across as a clawing, grasping-at-straws desperation that's revolting. There's More...
I was surprised to have a conversation with my 20-something pal Kyle recently, who told me that one of the things young women do these days to get men's attention is to pretend to be lesbians. I was rather amused by this, and only mildly surprised that it was widespread. I was wondering if he weren't exaggerating.
Then I read Sometimes I Like Girls on the Either/Or weblog (thanks, Yeti) and I realized that Kyle probably wasn't exaggerating.
Human sexuality is interesting stuff. I note that what we're seeing here, though, seems to match up with recent scientific studies on the differences between male and female sexual response. It seems like the movie Chasing Amy was far more realistic than some in the queer community wanted to credit it with being.
Then I read Sometimes I Like Girls on the Either/Or weblog (thanks, Yeti) and I realized that Kyle probably wasn't exaggerating.
Human sexuality is interesting stuff. I note that what we're seeing here, though, seems to match up with recent scientific studies on the differences between male and female sexual response. It seems like the movie Chasing Amy was far more realistic than some in the queer community wanted to credit it with being.
I'm not a huge baseball fan, but it's always nice to see an underdog win the World Series.
Baseball's been a yawner for such a long time. "Who are the Yankees playing in the World Series this year?" seems to be the cliche question. Well yeah, but at least this time they got their socks knocked off.
(Sorry Michele.)
Baseball's been a yawner for such a long time. "Who are the Yankees playing in the World Series this year?" seems to be the cliche question. Well yeah, but at least this time they got their socks knocked off.
(Sorry Michele.)
October 25, 2003
Kate's got a single picture that says ten thousand words.
Although if you want more pictures, with words, here's more.
We done good in Afghanistan, and are still doing good. Don't ever let anyone try to tell you otherwise.
Although if you want more pictures, with words, here's more.
We done good in Afghanistan, and are still doing good. Don't ever let anyone try to tell you otherwise.
Not only do we now have more Iraqi bloggers blogging from Iraq (see "Healing Iraq" below) but we have more and more webloggers who are soldiers stationed in Iraq. Gulf War II vet Scott Koenig has the latest roundup of good postings from soldiers in Iraq, and introduces a new weblogger who's just arrived in Baghdad.
Don't say the blogosphere doesn't have original reporting, because it does!
Don't say the blogosphere doesn't have original reporting, because it does!
If you haven't seen it yet, there are two videos on news stories done so far on Chief Wiggles:
Click here to see the first story, and click here to see the second, more detailed, story. You'll need Quicktime.
MSNBC, which planned to turn a show on the toy drive last night, has pushed the story back until Monday.
Reminder: you can find out a lot more at the Operation Give web site.
We have, so far, collected over $10,000 in donations, and have lost track of the number of boxes we've received at the Baltimore warehouse, although we'll have a tally of that some time in the next few days. FedEx is working with us to relieve some of our shipping costs. More news as we have it.
Click here to see the first story, and click here to see the second, more detailed, story. You'll need Quicktime.
MSNBC, which planned to turn a show on the toy drive last night, has pushed the story back until Monday.
Reminder: you can find out a lot more at the Operation Give web site.
We have, so far, collected over $10,000 in donations, and have lost track of the number of boxes we've received at the Baltimore warehouse, although we'll have a tally of that some time in the next few days. FedEx is working with us to relieve some of our shipping costs. More news as we have it.
* Update * I can't believe I forgot to mention that Gail Halvorsen has a brief interview in the first video. But he does.
Lisa Belkin has a piece in the New York Times Magazine entitled The Opt-Out Revolution that you should read. Belkin, who gave up her fast-track full-time career to spend more time with her children, writes of other high-powered, Ivy-League-degreed women who make the same choice--and notes how the trend is growing.
She also notes, in passing, how the higher the income, the more they achieve, the more likely they are to eventually make the choice to opt out of their careers, or scale their careers back dramatically, in favor of family. I can't tell you how many younger, lower-income women I know who wish to hell they could afford the same choice (although I think more of them could do it than they realize, if they had the right sort of man in their lives).
What's most telling to me is that the older the women who make this choice, the more guilt and ambivalence they feel about it. The older ones were taught that they had an obligation to career; the younger ones, far less so.
Anyway, go read the whole thing. It's good. And predictive, I think, of a major shift in the coming generations.
(Thanks, Diana.)
She also notes, in passing, how the higher the income, the more they achieve, the more likely they are to eventually make the choice to opt out of their careers, or scale their careers back dramatically, in favor of family. I can't tell you how many younger, lower-income women I know who wish to hell they could afford the same choice (although I think more of them could do it than they realize, if they had the right sort of man in their lives).
What's most telling to me is that the older the women who make this choice, the more guilt and ambivalence they feel about it. The older ones were taught that they had an obligation to career; the younger ones, far less so.
Anyway, go read the whole thing. It's good. And predictive, I think, of a major shift in the coming generations.
(Thanks, Diana.)