July 31, 2004
FAHRENCRAP
I just got back from watching
Fahrencrap 9/11 with some friends; the one husband mailed his bootleg copy from Iraq, so we thought we'd give it a look. I thought I'd have a lot to say after I watched it, but I only have three words for Michael Moore. Boring. As. Hell. Seriously, my friend put it best when she said it was like watching one of those videos in middle school where you knew there would be a quiz but you could barely keep your eyes open. Maybe it was because I've already read so much commentary about the movie, but I found myself looking at my watch a lot. There were a few funny bits that kept us going, but that's not saying much; there were funny bits in
Dude, Where's My Car? too, but it ain't winnin' any awards. I can't believe people had to pay money to see this movie.
Oh, and I could've gone my whole life without hearing Michael Moore say "who's your daddy"...
Posted by: Sarah at
07:07 PM
| Comments (13)
| Add Comment
Post contains 172 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I told you about it. How mad were you after the movie? I wonder how good the showing went in Crawford, TX?
Posted by: birdie at July 31, 2004 07:30 PM (ohCKH)
2
With over a hundred million in revenues so far and the Cannes Film Festival Award for best picture it seems your opinion is pretty marginal.
Posted by: dc at July 31, 2004 11:34 PM (s6c4t)
3
I would hardly say that view is marginal. $100 million in revenue is not chump change, but it doesn't mean it is mainstream either. The level of rhetoric surrounding the debunking of the very same movie demonstrates exactly the opposite. In a world where Nobel prizes are given out as political statements I hardly think a Cannes award lends much credibility.
Posted by: John at August 01, 2004 04:27 AM (+Ysxp)
4
dc,
Have you seen the movie? It's the worst documentary I've ever seen. And it's as boring as Sarah said it was. I'm gonna pop it in the dvd player when I can't sleep at night.
Posted by: Bush Lover at August 01, 2004 07:54 AM (fUuNr)
5
I did see the movie at a sold out theater in Orange County, CA. I heard the audience laugh, I heard the audience cry, I did not hear any yawns, and at the end the audience rose up in a standing ovation. I have never seen that at a movie before.
I thought the movie was a very effective critique of Bush from a very patriotic point of view.
Posted by: dc at August 01, 2004 11:53 AM (s6c4t)
6
dc,
I laughed when I read your poetic desription of the experience you had in that sold out Orange County theater. I don't know what movie you and the other loonies were watching, but I'd like whatever drugs you're on. There's nothing patriotic about bashing our commander in chief jack ass.
Posted by: Bush Lover at August 01, 2004 03:06 PM (+ilId)
7
bush lover, you are confused. No one owes loyalty to Bush, he is just a politician trying his best to take care of his elite constituency. We owe our loyalty to America and to the American people. Bush is a terrible president and a terrible commander in chief and it is time he was replaced by someone worthy of those roles. If 'bashing bush' accomplished that task then by all means we should bash bush. But Bush does enough damage by his own actions that nothing I or anyone else can do can make him look any worse.
Posted by: dc at August 01, 2004 08:32 PM (s6c4t)
8
America is a whole lot larger and more diverse than orange county CA and it is hardly respresentative of the country as a whole. I saw the same reaction you describe at the end of Saving Private Ryan with one audience, stunned silence and respect from a different audience.
Cheering something does not make it the truth, and sipping the kool-aid is bad for your critical thinking skills.
Posted by: John at August 01, 2004 09:40 PM (crTpS)
9
It's been a while since Iv'e seen the movie so may be someone can help me out. What did the dead soldier say in his letter to his mother about Bush? Does anyone one remember?
Posted by: dc at August 02, 2004 12:56 PM (s6c4t)
10
Why don't you remind us what the dead soldier said dc? You're the one that had the life-changing experience by watching that piece of crap film.
And unfortunately for you, Bush was elected by the majority of people in the US. If that doesn't earn him some respect, I don't know what will. Since you are so hard on Bush, I'd like to know how much fun you'd be having if Saddam were our president.
Posted by: Bush Lover at August 02, 2004 02:47 PM (cM11/)
11
"And unfortunately for you, Bush was elected by the majority of people in the US."
Um. No. NO. NO!
Bush was NOT elected by the majority of the United States. He was NOT elected by a PLURALITY of the United States. He was the RUNNER-UP in the popular vote.
The only reason why Bush is occupying the White House is that states like Wyoming (pop. 500K) get 3 electoral votes while states like Connecticut (pop. 3M) get only eight.
So, Bush was the choice neither of a majority, nor a plurality of Americans.
"If that doesn't earn him some respect, I don't know what will."
How about paying something more than lip service to his so-called "compassionate conservatism?" How about not squandering the good will and respect of the rest of the world? How about testifying before the 9/11 commission without having his hand held by his vice-president?
Those would have been nice starters, but too late for that.
Posted by: Can't win at August 02, 2004 08:08 PM (aQOKC)
12
Seeing as how Bush Lover apparently slept through the last election, I seriously doubt he/she even knows the difference between a plurality and a majority. But you're right, Bush had neither. So by his/her logic, doesn't that mean we should have even more respect for Gore, since he did? Whaddya say, Bush Lover, give a shoutout to Gore, who deserves your respect for having won a larger share of the popular vote than Bush. I'll hold my breath.
Posted by: Like anyone cares at August 02, 2004 10:51 PM (u+Iyg)
13
DC,
If only 8% of the country has seen the movie (and mathematically, fewer liked it) it seems the voices in opposition have a much larger base.
I wonder were you in the service when you heard the words of the "dead" soldier? I have heard the words of dying servicemen in combat.
If you would like to know what they say, I would be happy to educate you.
I don't want an reluctant warrior and opportunist as this country's C-in-C.
Just drop me line anytime you want, DC, I'll tell you all about what men say in combat.
//JCL
USMC '88-'94
Posted by: jcrue at August 10, 2004 06:51 PM (G9kk0)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
MEAN
Ohhhh, this is mean. One of the German pop-ups makes the same sound that Yahoo messenger makes! That sound makes any military wife come running, hoping that her husband has just logged in; instead you find a pop-up for T-Mobile. Mean, mean, mean.
My computer programmer friend is coming over tomorrow to do scary things to my computer that include the words "reinstall" and "virus". Hopefully she can teach me how to get rid of all of these damn pop-ups, especially the extremely graphic German porn ones.
Posted by: Sarah at
03:00 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 89 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: Madfish Willie at August 01, 2004 03:28 PM (uvu7I)
2
Also there is a post over at MuNuviana that deals with free software for removing virii etc... the recommendationed software worked wonders on all the systems I installed it on... Then, switch to Mozilla and forget about all the pop-up nonsense.
Posted by: Mudfish Billie at August 01, 2004 03:30 PM (uvu7I)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
HOPE
As commenter kdeweb said, "This is HI-larious."
Kerry
tried to shake some Marines' hands...
MORE TO GROK:
And I love the caption Duane put on the photo!
Posted by: Sarah at
09:06 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 29 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I love the look of the Marine on the right. Looking over at Kerry like "what the hell is he doing?"
Hee hee. Sorry - I'm easily entertained right now.
Posted by: Tammi at August 01, 2004 11:21 AM (mfDpJ)
2
Thanks, I try. And every once in a while I actually come up with a good one!
Thank your husband for his service. And thank you for yours. My sister is a Navy wife so I have some understanding of your sacrifice.
Posted by: Duane at August 01, 2004 02:45 PM (bUHuL)
3
when I was in the corps, they taught us manners. To bad that's no longer required.
Posted by: John Bravenec at August 02, 2004 01:32 PM (hKTk0)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
ST. AVOLD
VDH writes about our
military cemeteries in St. Avold, France:
The inscriptions at American graveyards admonish the visitor to remember sacrifice, courage, and freedom; they assume somebody bad once started a war to hurt the weak, only to fail when somebody better stopped them.
I've been to St. Avold, on Veteran's Day, led by two old men who understood Joe and Tommy's sacrifice. My distant relatives from Lorraine, who lost a brother in WWII, took me to see the greatest generation that slumbers beneath French soil, at a time when that unfortunately didn't mean as much to me as it does now. That rainy day in November 1998 I was more amused than anything as these two septuagenarians insisted that we talk to every cemetery director and guard so that they could introduce me as their cousine américaine. They were so proud to be sharing Armistice Day with an American, and I was a dumb kid who didn't appreciate their enthusiasm.
One of those grateful old men passed away last fall, and I was too stubborn to go see him. Only today did I realize that I let my hatred of France prevent me from paying respect to a good and decent man. I let things like this get in the way of family and honor. I realize that I have been so angry at our former allies that I refused to go say goodbye to a dear old man, and all of a sudden I feel ashamed.
The men of St. Avold would've wanted me to behave better.
Posted by: Sarah at
05:43 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 263 words, total size 2 kb.
July 30, 2004
CARPET BOMBING
Amritas pointed me to a
Nelson Ascher post that I wish I'd seen yesterday.
All this to say that hearing day after day, reading hour after hour, watching minute after minute for months and months all the liberal media, that is, basically all the media telling me that Kerry will win, that Bush doesnÂ’t have a chance is not only exhausting. ItÂ’s just natural that for a couple of minutes or even hours a week my rational defenses will be taking some rest, and if this happens repeatedly, the message about the inevitability of a Kerry victory will begin to grow roots in my brain. And this makes me afraid because I know weÂ’re watching the most complete, worldwide, continuous media effort ever to influence an election. What the world media is doing is the most aggressive, savage campaign of carpet-bombing in human history.
I've succumbed to the carpet-bombing. Many people I know and bloggers I read have also succumbed. We're weary and dejected. I talked to a Soldier who just yesterday -- just yesterday -- found out that Kerry attended anti-war rallies after he came home from Vietnam. Just. Yesterday. The brainwashing the media has done is incredible, and it absolutely makes me want to cry.
My laser beam is in trouble. So is Ascher's, it seems. Nelson, we have to stay strong. We have to refocus. We have to Forget the Idiots Today, like you encouraged me to do on 9-11-03:
I also know I should avoid reading much today, because many, probably most things that are and will be published will make me even angrier. And the problem is not that I don't want to be angrier: I do want. The problem is that I do not want to waste a miligram of my anger on all the idiots who have been getting ready to show us how idiotic they are. We're at a point where to be too angry at, say, Chomsky and the BBC, Old Europe and ANSWER, second and third rate entertainers and academics is to give them a kind of victory. They deserve disdain. Anger needs to remain concentrated like light in a laser beam, we must direct it toward its rightful target: Islamofascism first and foremost. If we spend too much time getting mad at those who are but idiots we run the risk of forgetting, even if only for a second, that it is the Muslim/Arab religious fanatics who are the ENEMY. In a way, that's the idiots' main weapon: to attract a wrath that could be more usefully directed to the really dangerous enemies. Whenever we're not thinking about the Jihadists we are losing some very precious time. And anger.
We need to stay strong. I have so much anger for the media these days that it's starting to cloud my resolve. I need to refocus. That Soldier who just yesterday learned of Kerry's anti-war past got a list of links to follow. He's open to the truth, and he'll find it eventually. And maybe he'll tell a friend.
Posted by: Sarah at
10:13 AM
| Comments (24)
| Add Comment
Post contains 513 words, total size 3 kb.
1
Sarah,
All we can do is keep pointing people in the right direction. Kerry's record can be fact checked all over the internet and after last nights speech there are quite a few points we can make.
Kerry says he's a leader.
Fact: Not one piece of legislature has his name on it.
Kerry says he's for the military.
Fact: Not once did he vote for an increase in military spending.
Kerry says he will make the military more hi-tech.
Fact: He did not approve funding for F-14, F-15, F-16, Patriot Missle, AH-64 Apache, etc.
I focused on military issues because of where you are, but most of his 'key note" issues are not backed up by his past voting record. Keep your chin up, all hope is not lost.
Posted by: Brass at July 30, 2004 10:46 AM (SrRJG)
2
Why so much anger? Don't worry.
Hope is on the way.
I am rfidtag and I approve this message.
Posted by: rfidtag at July 30, 2004 10:54 AM (XxIKf)
3
I'm not entirely sure from which outlets you get your news, but this week, I basically haven't watched TV, because the coverage is constantly on the DNC convention. So this week has been a bad one.
The other day, I saw a young punk driving his souped-up Honda Civic--you know, the kind with the huge spoiler?--with not one, but two Bush/Cheney stickers on the bumper. In PENNSYLVANIA.
This week's convention taints everything in the news. I have no doubt that the media is incredibly biased and trying to influence the election, but I think it will get (a little) better when the Republican convention rolls into town. The thing I most fear is not the pre-election buzz, but the thought of problems with ballot counting.
Hang tough, we'll get there.
Posted by: Carla at July 30, 2004 11:02 AM (r5M6F)
4
I'm actually feeling pretty good about things and the trends I observe in those around me.
Beyond hyped media coverage, I see almost zero enthusiasm for Kerry locally, and quite a bit more for Bush than I did the last time he was elected.
Isn't Iowa a battle ground state?
Posted by: John at July 30, 2004 11:32 AM (+Ysxp)
5
As a side note, both Kerry and Bush will be in my town on Wednesday the 4th, should be intersting.
Posted by: John at July 30, 2004 11:33 AM (+Ysxp)
6
I just found your site. I understand your dejection but keep slogging through the swamp of misinformation from the MSM. I enjoy reading blogs from military families. You all help me get through the worry and the uncertainty. Years ago I was in your position as the wife of a deployed soldier, now I am the mother. Deployments are a time of ups and downs (emotionally mostly downs), but it is also a time for us to fight. We must fight against the lies in the media to protect the morale of those overseas. We must fight with the truth. You are performing a service. You are just as important as those doing the heavy lifting in Iraq. Today you have the internet to communicate with others who think as you do. Don't get discouraged - your sanity, your voice, and your web site will help your country, your military, and your husband. The truth will win in the end. GO BUSH.
Posted by: Navy Mom at July 30, 2004 01:07 PM (b/7hi)
7
Kerry will be a smart courageous president just as he was a smart courageous hero in Vietnam. He will be someone the military as well as the general public can and will respect. Unlike the dim bulb in the white house now Kerry will also get the respect of the rest of the world. God knows we need it.
Posted by: dc at July 30, 2004 03:43 PM (s6c4t)
8
dc,
Just like he was in Vietnam? So your saying we will only get a President for four months? Sounds about right.
Posted by: Brass at July 30, 2004 04:57 PM (SrRJG)
9
Kerry, as you know served two terms of duty in Vietnam, both times as a volunteer. On his second tour he commanded a fast boats up the river into enemy territory. It was on this second tour that Kerry was wounded under fire recieving three purple hearts, a bronze star and a silver star. It was US policy that after taking hostile fire resulting in three injuries any service member has paid his dues in full and was entitled to go stateside. Do you have a problem with the fact that Kerry saw so much action that he did this in only four months?
Posted by: dc at July 30, 2004 05:58 PM (s6c4t)
10
I have a problem with the fact he put himself in for all those awards. I have a problem with the fact that he bad mouthed his fellow service men when he returned to the US. I have a problem with him taking the one noble thing he ever did (service to the US) and tarnishing it by his actions then and now. That is the problem I have.
Posted by: Brass at July 30, 2004 06:29 PM (SrRJG)
11
Sarah,
Keep the faith.
Kalroy
Posted by: Kalroy at July 30, 2004 07:40 PM (q1aeu)
12
For those of you "claiming" Kerry nominated himself for his awards had better re-read the citations. Of course re-reading them would involve comprehension, and I see so little of that here. Including the "site-owner"
Posted by: Anonamoose at July 30, 2004 08:35 PM (4pVZJ)
13
It's only natural to feel carpet bombed at this point; this is the nadir.
As for me, I'm holding fire until September (except from time to time when I just can't hold back, like today). Remember, we're after the undecided and the backslidden, not the choir or the enemy.
Keep the faith.
Posted by: pedro at July 30, 2004 10:40 PM (WwaHk)
14
There should be no surpise that thoughtful members of the military support Kerry. He is one of the band of brothers brought together and forever bonded by common war experience. Kerry is also a real hero. He is living proof that the US military never leaves a fellow soldier behind. At great personal risk, while injured, he turned his boat around and went back to save the life of Green Beret Rassman who was blown into the water and was taking fire from both sides of the river. Kerry exposed himself to the fire while pulling Rassman into the boat with his good arm. This is the kind of man any soldier can admire and respect as commander in chief. Compare him with Bush and you see why so many soldiers will be voting for Kerry in November.
Posted by: dc at July 30, 2004 11:02 PM (s6c4t)
15
Sarah - don't be weary - have faith. Any 'man' who returns during a time of war to LIE about our brave soldiers is a traitor. Listen to his words (all of which were disproved go to
Winter Soldier to see for yourself).
Here are two sound files that you should send to ANYONE who is feeling down and out. John Kerry is AGAINST using force for ANY reason. Any potential president after 9/11 (and while we're at war) who would say 'we will respond forcefully to any attack' - is missing the point of acting BEFORE we're attacked.
U.S. Soldiers are War Criminals
John Kerry committed war crimes
Keep your chin up. Truth will prevail.
Posted by: Kathleen Acton at July 30, 2004 11:17 PM (vnAYT)
16
After the Abu Garab prison scandel photos provided documented proof that soldiers in an immoral war without proper supervision can stoop to the level of sadistic tortureres can anyone doubt the veracity of the testimony soldiers gave about their experiences in Vietnam? What do you want, pictures?
Can you not except the testimony of hundreds of US soldiers with nothing to gain but their immortal souls back by telling the truth.
Posted by: dc at July 31, 2004 12:11 AM (s6c4t)
17
Just as I don't paint supporters of Kerry with the same brush (of ALL being stupid) I WON'T paint all 140,000 soldiers in Iraq as being engaged in criminal behavior.
Our biggest problem isn't Abu Graib - our biggest problem is being sidetracked from the fact that the ENEMY will do worse (and is doing worse) to everyone they get their hands on. They are not part of the Geneva Convention (which doesn't excuse the 20 soldiers that abused prisoners) - but the point is - ONE DIRTY CRIMINAL DOES NOT THE ENTIRE MILITARY MAKE.
Posted by: Kathleen A at July 31, 2004 01:06 AM (vnAYT)
18
I take it you would rather have these atrocities swept under the rug, ingored and unpunished.
Look, Kerry after his service in Vietnam told the truth about what was happening in Vietnam. So too did a soldier recentlyin Iraq just a few short months ago when he anonomously wrote to his commanding officer about the atrocities at Abu Garab. Both did the right thing by telling the truth about what was going on.
You don't like it cause it reflects poorly on the entire military. Tough. But everone knows that it the result of command failure that these things are allowed to happen. Command failure starts at the top. Just like in Vietnam when civilian commanders screwed up, so too is Bush, Rumsfield and the other neocons screwing up in Iraq. Just like in Vietnam where the majority of soldiers thought the war was a mistake so too in Iraq where the majority of soldiers feel likewise. When the civilian leadership scews the pooch big time so that the military looks bad it is no wonder so many people demand a change in that leadership.
Posted by: dc at July 31, 2004 02:15 AM (s6c4t)
19
Knock it off with the Abu Ghraib crap. I'm sure you've heard of the
Stanford Prison Experiment, where regular old college students resorted to torture and humiliation of their fellow students; the experiment had to be called off in a mere
five days because it was getting out of control. And these were not insurgents who had actually killed one's brothers in arms; these were classmates divided up arbitrarily. So save me the "command failure" and "immoral war" bullshit. Kathleen is right, the enemy is doing much worse.
Posted by: Sarah at July 31, 2004 04:52 AM (MEwtV)
20
Sarah - don't lose hope. I was in a political chatroom recently. Someone was talking about swing states saying this and this state would for sure go to Kerry so they really didn't have anything to worry about. One of those states was Minnesota. I told the person Minnesota was not "in the bag" for Kerry. It was very close and that Minnesota's Republican base has grown over the past 10 yrs to the point of the state being almost evenly split. The person was amazed and had no clue and could only say but Minnesota has always gone for the Democrats. I told the person President Bush only lost by 4% in the 2000 race. They had no clue and that is I think going to be the downfall of rank and file Democrats. They don't listen!
Posted by: Toni at July 31, 2004 08:58 AM (BtkvW)
21
Sarah, you proved my point about 'command failure' and out of controll soldiers by reference to the Stanford Prison Experiment. How else to explain perfectly norman Americans acting in such perfectly atrocious ways?
What I don't get however is how you can excuse any soldiers angry lashing out at the enemy just because they killed one of his brothers in arms. Isn't that exactly what the enemy is supposed to do? It is a simple fact of war that while our soldiers are trying to kill them they are likewise trying to kill ours. As human beings I am sure that fighters on both sides feel anger and hatred towards each other. After all they are trying to kill each other. But in a professional military these emotions cannot be allowed to be expressed through torture or the brutilization of the other side. You may scoff at the moral constraints on warfare but let me reassure you, once we lose the moral high ground the war is as good as lost militarily as well.
Posted by: dc at July 31, 2004 11:47 AM (s6c4t)
22
The fundamental problem is that those who control most of the communications channels in this country...from news commentators to entertainers to college professors...have decided to destroy Bush, and they are using the full resources of their organizations to accomplish this. (These are resources that do not belong to them; they belong to the shareholders, taxpayers, or whoever..but this doesn't deter them.) The behavior is particularly egregious in the case of the major networks and their affliates, who have government-protected monopolies (in the form of their licenses ri exclusive frequencies) and who thus have an affirmative duty to present things in a reasonably balanced way, but seem to be making remarkably little attempt to do so.
Thank goodness for the Internet.
Posted by: David Foster at August 01, 2004 12:23 AM (XUtCY)
23
Sarah:
You WILL NOT give up! "Never, ever, ever, give up!" You know who rallied his fellow citizens with those words.
To borrow from Sir Winston some more, I am one of the "so many" who "owe so much" to you, one of the "so few". In this new information age, where the mainstream media are so obviously advocating for Kedwards, and are so viscerally antagonistic toward the Iraq campaign, and subtly (and sometimes not-so-subtly) antagonistic toward your husband, Gator Six, SFC Chromey, LCDR Smash, and all the other men and women who are giving of themselves for us their families, and their comrades-in-arms--we here in the states who don't have someone close to the field of battle, we NEED the Sarahs,Mrs. Chromedomes, the Tims. We even need the Citizen Smashes, too, who come back, see the situation here, assess it, and defend his C in C (and the justness of this campaign), and tells the TRUTH.
You, Sarah, are a bearer of truth. Many of the Old Testament prophets open their books with the phrase, "The BURDEN of the Lord...": bearing the truth is a burden. Sometimes bearing the truth sucks. But you chose to marry your Soldier-husband. He chose to enlist (or be commissioned?). Of course, neither of you chose this world, this time of national crisis. But perhaps Divine Providence has placed you there? (I confess: (I hold to the concept espoused by our founding fathers which they alluded to in our Declaration of Independence.) "Who knows but that you were born for such a time as this?"
Long, I know. But meant to encourage you. I do wish I could contribute again. I served in the USN back in the Carter years, and am now too old--besides, I understand the Navy is going to draw down some 8,000 Sailors in FY '05! What are they thinking?! Oh, well a different topic, a different post.
Keep the faith, check six, and steady as she goes.
GBY,
Jim
Posted by: Jim Shawley at August 01, 2004 12:55 AM (uyTD+)
24
To DC:
You, sir (I assume), are (to be charitable) out of line. You engage in non sequitur postings, and throw up specious arguments, and attempt to condemn the whole by taking the micro and extrapolating out to the macro. Typical stunt performed by lazy polemists.
Speaking of non-sequiturs, I know without a doubt there is no gold in Alaska. I've never found any there (of course, that I've never been to Alaska may or may not be germane to the issue--all depends on which political party I am a member of). In like manner, that there have "only" been 35 155mm howitzer shells packed with binary sarin found in Iraq, since I haven't found any, I suppose that means there aren't any stockpiles.
Don't bother arguing; you would be wasting your time as well as mine and Sarah's: She and I, as well as all of us who look at this world without rose-colored glasses are not going to be swayed by malarky and nonsense.
Cordially,
Jim
Posted by: Jim Shawley at August 01, 2004 01:17 AM (uyTD+)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
UPDATE
My home computer has major problems right now, so blogging might be rough this weekend. Plus I have final papers to grade, so don't expect much.
Knitting update: Still waiting for the pink and white yarn. It's in the mail, thanks to my mother-in-law, and I'm anxious to get that project done. Especially since it's still sweater weather here in Germany. I have started a new sweater already and finished the back last night (photo later when my computer stops acting like a jerk). In the meantime, I found a pattern I'd really like to try, save two major obstacles: 1) the yarn is honkin' expensive and 2) intarsia knitting is something I've never done before; I even had to google it because I didn't know what the heck it was. Plus I have a ton of projects I should already be working on first, but I keep pulling up this pattern and looking at it longingly. So many patterns, only two hands...
Posted by: Sarah at
09:07 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 165 words, total size 1 kb.
MUST READ
Many thanks to
Bunker for pointing me in the direction of
The Case for George W. Bush. I do not understand the gut feelings of distaste that many have for President Bush, for when I look at him I see a man who is
sincere and
down to earth. But despite Junod's revulsion, he manages to look past the ad hominem. The part that gave me chills:
In 1861, Abraham Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus, and historians today applaud the restraint he displayed in throwing thousands of American citizens in jail. By the middle of 2002, George W. Bush had declared two American citizens enemy combatants, and both men are still in jail at this writing, uncharged. Both presidents used war as a rationale for their actions, citing as their primary constitutional responsibility the protection of the American people. It was not until two years later that Congress took up Lincoln's action and pronounced it constitutionally justified. Our willingness to extend Bush the same latitude will depend on our perception of what exactly we're up against, post-9/11. Lincoln was fighting for the very soul of this country; he was fighting to preserve this country, as a country, and so he had to challenge the Constitution in order to save it. Bush seems to think that he's fighting for the very soul of this country, but that's exactly what many people regard as a dangerous presumption. He seems to think that he is fighting for our very survival, when all we're asking him to fight for is our security, which is a very different thing. A fight for our security? We can handle that; it means we have to get to the airport early. A fight for our survival? That means we have to live in a different country altogether. That means the United States is changing and will continue to change, the way it did during and after the Civil War, with a fundamental redefinition of executive authority.
Posted by: Sarah at
08:46 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 334 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Hi Sarah. Hope all is well your way.
I do not understand the gut feelings of distaste that many have for President Bush, for when I look at him I see a man who is sincere and down to earth.
Ron Reagan Jr. wrote an item which may aid your
understanding; it's essentially a laundry list of
the past three plus years. Perhaps it will help:
The Case Against George W. Bush
Politicians will stretch the truth. They'll exaggerate their accomplishments, paper over their gaffes. Spin has long been the lingua franca of the political realm. But George W. Bush and his administration have taken "normal" mendacity to a startling new level far beyond lies of convenience. On top of the usual massaging of public perception, they traffic in big lies, indulge in any number of symptomatic small lies, and, ultimately, have come to embody dishonesty itself. They are a lie. And people, finally, have started catching on.
None of this, needless to say, guarantees Bush a one-term presidency. The far-right wing of the country—nearly one third of us by some estimates—continues to regard all who refuse to drink the Kool-Aid (liberals, rationalists, Europeans, et cetera) as agents of Satan. Bush could show up on video canoodling with Paris Hilton and still bank their vote. Right-wing talking heads continue painting anyone who fails to genuflect deeply enough as a "hater," and therefore a nut job, probably a crypto-Islamist car bomber. But these protestations have taken on a hysterical, almost comically desperate tone. It's one thing to get trashed by Michael Moore. But when Nobel laureates, a vast majority of the scientific community, and a host of current and former diplomats, intelligence operatives, and military officials line up against you, it becomes increasingly difficult to characterize the opposition as fringe wackos.
Does anyone really favor an administration that so shamelessly lies? One that so tenaciously clings to secrecy, not to protect the American people, but to protect itself? That so willfully misrepresents its true aims and so knowingly misleads the people from whom it derives its power? I simply cannot think so. And to come to the same conclusion does not make you guilty of swallowing some liberal critique of the Bush presidency, because that's not what this is. This is the critique of a person who thinks that lying at the top levels of his government is abhorrent. Call it the honest guy's critique of George W. Bush.
And there's so much more. Best wishes, Al.
Posted by: Big Al at July 30, 2004 09:00 PM (aaw7a)
2
Oops! Here's the link:
http://www.esquire.com/cgi-bin/printtool/print.cgi?pages=5&filename=/features/articles/2004/040729_mfe_reagan.html&x=64&y=6
Posted by: Big Al at July 30, 2004 09:01 PM (aaw7a)
3
Section 9, Clause 2 of the United States Constituion reads:
"The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it. "
Pundits and journalists who write about Lincoln suspension of Habeas Corpus as outside of constitutional law should first read the Constitution. The southern states were clearly in rebellion against the country. Public Safety clearly required Lincoln take drastic action including the arrest of rebels throughout the country wherever they be found.
Today however we face no such crisis. Terrorism is a criminal matter not one of national survival. England fought the IRA, Germany fought the Red Brigade, and numerous other western democracies fought terrorists using both their military and international law enforcement agencies as well as domestic police forces.
Those who see the fight against al quida in purely military terms are playing right into the hands of the terrorists strategy: make it a battle between the Christian West and the Islamic countries. By falling for this Crusader mentality we grow our enemies faster than we can ever defeat them.
The solution takes wiser leadership than we currently have in Washington. Bush and the neocons are certain in their convictions, I'll give them that, but haven't a clue beyond belligerance.
Posted by: dc at July 31, 2004 01:27 PM (s6c4t)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 29, 2004
CLOSE
Well, we didn't quite make it to a full
sewing machine, but we got close (together we donated $300). My sincere thanks to everyone who pitched in for this project of mine. Hopefully the women of Ramadi will be sewing like the wind soon...
Posted by: Sarah at
10:45 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 46 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Excellent 'Three Amigos' reference.
Posted by: Brass at July 29, 2004 11:09 AM (SrRJG)
2
Brass, thanks for noticing...
Posted by: Sarah at July 30, 2004 08:08 AM (xNgp/)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
HMMM
There may be correlation, but is there causation?
Fear of hell makes us richer, Fed says
Posted by: Sarah at
09:22 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 18 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Ellen Johnson, president of American Atheists Inc. said:
"I cannot imagine what the belief in mythological beings or things that don't exist can do for business. What about the pornographic industry?"
It would depend what the "mythological beings or things" tell you to do, don't you think?
The bit about pornography is a red herring. It is well established that lack of corruption promotes prosperity.
Hell is not necessarily the only thing which discourages corruption. It need only discourage some people to show up in the statistics.
Posted by: David Boxenhorn at July 29, 2004 12:11 PM (z7KJm)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
FUNDING
Tanker sent me
this link from Iraq the Model. Those brothers are smart cookies:
This reveals the fact that the terroristsÂ’ resources are no longer sufficient to their expenses and this is what made them seek financial support through these criminal operations.
Ok, we know now that theyÂ’re close to bankruptcy and here come two countries to reinforce the terrorists position by withdrawing from Iraq. And people here in Iraq believe that Manilla paid several millions of dollars to free the hostage just like what the Egyptians did when the Egyptian embassy announced that the operation was more about money than about politics.
Do you know what this means?
Millions of dollars mean hundreds of victims. TheyÂ’re funding terror in one way or another and I find it very stupid that negotiations take place through the help of a highly under suspicion-group like the "Sunni Muslim Cleric Council".
ThereÂ’s a deal to fund terror in a different way than before and there are groups and countries who support this and maneuver to override the obstacles.
Negotiating with those thugs provides them with legitimacy let alone submitting to their demands and funding them.
Posted by: Sarah at
09:17 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 194 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Our friends the Germans did the same thing last September. Several of their nationals, plus a couple of others, were vacationing in southern Algeria (a Darwin Awards move if there ever was one), and were taken hostage by an Islamist group with ties to Al-Qaeda. According to the BBC (!!), Germany laundered what amounted to a ransom payment through Mali, and ultimately obtained their release.
http://tigerhawk.blogspot.com/2004/07/jihadists-win-again.html
Posted by: Jack at July 29, 2004 02:18 PM (0E1sl)
2
Here's the URL of my original post on the German hostage payment and the war in the Sahara:
http://tigerhawk.blogspot.com/2004/06/war-spreads-to-sahara.html
Posted by: Jack at July 29, 2004 02:21 PM (0E1sl)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
SULLIVAN
I just posted this over on
Vodkapundit's fisking of Andrew Sullivan.
"I have no real beef with Sullivan, but I don't visit his site as often as I used to. I was curious to hear that he had added a donkey to the header on his blog, so I went over there and just read this:
QUOTE OF THE DAY: "As few as five people in black robes can look at a particular issue and determine for the rest of us, insinuate for the rest of us that they are speaking as the majority will. They are not." - Rep. John Hostettler, the Republican who authored the bill that would strip federal courts of the right to consider the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act. But, of course, it could also be said about the five Supreme Court Justices who made George W. Bush the president of the United States. The Republicans love courts when they reach the right decision; they just despise them when they don't.
Wow. Has he really gotten that far out of hand that he's playing the Bush-stole-the-election game? Geez."
If the man wants to vote for Kerry, then so be it. But please don't all of a sudden start claiming that the election was rigged and other such nonsense. I have always respected Sullivan for his research and insight, so this recent Quote of the Day made my jaw drop.
Posted by: Sarah at
06:20 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 238 words, total size 2 kb.
1
I now doubt Andrew's sincerity on anything. If he is a one-issue voter, he certainly has been pulling the wool over our eyes for a long time. But that's how it now appears.
Posted by: Mike at July 29, 2004 07:24 AM (MqNKC)
Posted by: annika at July 29, 2004 02:22 PM (zAOEU)
3
Sullivan was my first non-Corner regular blog read. Sadly, I rarely bother to check his site anymore.
Posted by: physics geek at July 30, 2004 01:26 PM (Xvrs7)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
PLEDGE
The other night I talked to a group of NRA-belonging, terrorist-hating Soldiers who do not plan to vote for President Bush, and I lost all the wind from my sails. If they're not voting for President Bush, the die-hard capitalist right-wingers from Oklahoma, then who will? This week I've begun to ready myself for a Bush defeat, just to be emotionally prepared. To be honest, I'm disappointed that I'm not more optimistic, but I just see so many factors working against President Bush.
The president plays a major role in my life. Whoever he is, he will be my husband's commander-in-chief and will determine a lot about our life over the next four years. And he will be due the respect that his title deserves. As MAJ Winters said in Band of Brothers, "We salute the rank, not the man."
I therefore take Dean Esmay's pledge:
Now here is my interesting question: I've made myself some friends among conservatives by speaking this way. But I do find myself wondering: how many of you on the right will embrace such a philosophy if John Kerry should carry the election in November?
I don't want to hear why you think it won't happen. Indulge me: pretend it might. How many of you will have the patriotism to say, "I disagree with many of his policy directions, I do not think he is conducting our foreign policy in the right way, but I will do my best to get behind him and support him until elections come around next time?"
I'm genuinely curious. For that is the stance I intend to take. I will refuse to call him traitor, loser, liar, incompetent. He will be my President, my Commander In Chief, the Chief Executive of a great nation, elected by the will of a majority of the electors in these 50 great united States. So even if he does things I disagree with in conducting foreign policy, I will say, "I respectfully disagree with the President's directions, but I will do my best to express my dissent respectfully and hope that I am mistaken and that he has made the proper decisions after all."
That's my pledge. How many of you will take a similar one?
I will make that pledge, as I have already pledged before. But I also echo Bunker's dismay:
As long as Kerry, if elected, acts like a President I will support him as one. Too bad Dubya wasn't given that opportunity.
MORE TO GROK:
And it's a good thing I found out about this Vietnam video before he became president, so there's still time to laugh at what a douche he is! Seriously, it's been three hours and I'm still giggling.
Posted by: Sarah at
05:55 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 455 words, total size 3 kb.
1
And just who are they going to vote for and why? Nobody? Kerry? Nader?
I'm kinda curious as to their mindset against Bush.
Posted by: John at July 29, 2004 08:17 AM (crTpS)
2
There may still be "time to laugh at what a douche he is" but at least Kerry was there. I can certainly understand why those serving in the military would value that experience and might not support someone who avoided military service.
Please not that Clinton was, bluntly, a tool and this also applies to him. I can understand why soldiers disliked him and the contempt with which his administration treated them.
Posted by: John Bravenec at July 29, 2004 04:49 PM (hKTk0)
3
Just because you are from Oklahoma doesn't mean you are a "die-hard capitalist right-winger." Like most things, political views are hardly ever black and white. People have free will and defy sterotypes. I was born and raised in Oklahoma. And as an Oklahoman, I resent when people pigeon hole me or my home state.
Dubya has made his case for four years. Let the people decide if his leadership has lived up to his promises.
Posted by: rfidtag at July 29, 2004 08:58 PM (/qocr)
4
Rfidtag, I too was born in Oklahoma, and all of my mom's family still lives there. But I promise you I will never lump you in with us...
Posted by: Sarah at July 30, 2004 04:18 AM (ygMv4)
5
John Bravenec, and joining the National Guard is not avoiding military service...
Posted by: Sarah at July 30, 2004 04:19 AM (ygMv4)
6
Sarah it is good to know you are a fellow Oklahoman. My family still lives scattered throughout Oklahoma, and Texas.
And no, I am not some black sheep who fled to NYC. I would have to say that my whole family is fairly independent and open minded. They are no sheep.
Posted by: rfidtag at July 30, 2004 11:00 AM (XxIKf)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
BLEAT
Hilarious
Bleat today. Trip to IKEA: done it myself, many times. Chili Cheese Burrito petition: signed it with my husband's name, since it's his favorite Bell item. And I can't decide if I laughed harder at this paragraph
This is why I am not completely undone by the news that it may take a while to fully electrify Iraq. It took DirecTV ten attempts to fix one dish, and no one was shooting at the techs.
or this one
I like my union; they've backed me up when I was in a corner. I just wish they didn't force me to subsidize pictures of the president standing in a sack of shit, that's all. Is that too much to ask?
I've said it before and I'll say it again: I'm hooked on Lileks.
Posted by: Sarah at
05:03 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 135 words, total size 1 kb.
KERRY
(via LGF) I wish all those people who spent eight bucks and two hours on
Fahrenheit 9/11 would spend 12 minutes watching the
Kerry On Iraq Documentary. I heard one person say that Moore's movie made President Bush look incompetent; well, Republicans can put together a series of clips that makes Kerry look just as bad.
MORE TO GROK:
Apparently Kerry already put together his own movie, which makes him sound like a complete tool. I can only imagine what my husband would say if I asked him what he'd think of a soldier reenacting glory scenes for film. Cripes.
(My brother and I used to make fake documentaries about him as a basketball player, with me as the announcer and interviewer. That seems really dorky to me now, and we were 9 and 7 when we did it. I can't believe Kerry was doing these things when he was an adult.)
Posted by: Sarah at
03:49 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 154 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Something about these films mr. Kerry made on his own bothers me a bit: Is this how he thinks of himself, 30 years ago? Have these movies become his memories of that time?
Living in the past is bad enough, but in a fantasy past?
-Tym
Posted by: Tym at July 29, 2004 11:22 AM (jKm1z)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
SHARPTON
I can't find a script online, but this morning I caught a few minutes of Al Sharpton's speech at the DNC. He was talking about how he hopes people have learned this year that anyone can rise up from welfare or a broken home to run for President of the United States, and the crowd went wild.
How much money does John Kerry have again?
Posted by: Sarah at
03:22 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 67 words, total size 1 kb.
July 28, 2004
POLLSTER
I read that stuff about 40% of Canadian teens saying the US is a "force for evil". Whatever. But I was interested in this part of the
article:
“What they’re reacting to is a sense that the U.S. is belligerent,” said the pollster who conducted the phone survey, Greg Lyle. “The U.S. is sort of bellicose, warmongering [and has] this sort of cowboy diplomacy.”
But former Canadian diplomat Martin Collacot says the teens are responding to cues from their government, the media and their teachers.
How about they're responding to cues from the pollster? I hope this quote was taken out of context, because when the pollster himself thinks Americans are warmongers, it might have an effect on the way he words his questions or interprets his data. Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe 40% of Canadian kids really are that ignorant without any cues at all.
Posted by: Sarah at
04:53 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 145 words, total size 1 kb.
1
At least 40% of Canadian kids are that ignorant. Trust me on this one. And they're taught it in school.
Posted by: David at July 28, 2004 07:49 AM (utzkC)
2
If you watch the morbidly obese degenerate subhuman's 'Bowling for Columbine' you would think Canada is paradise compared to America. But then why is their suicide rate even higher than America's???????
Posted by: Tanker Schreiber at July 28, 2004 02:59 PM (aSTx+)
3
'...why is their suicide rate even higher than America's?' Because they have nothing worth living for. Their socialist cradle-to-grave system deprives the citizenry the priviledge to struggle, the sense of achievement as a result of such struggle. The Swiss suicide rate is pretty high too, and the German military's suicide rate is higher than American military's in Iraq. Nothing to die for = nothing to live for.
Posted by: ic at July 29, 2004 04:37 AM (yJngx)
4
The suicide rate of French civilians in peacetime is higher than that of US soldiers in combat in Iraq!
Posted by: Tanker Schreiber at July 29, 2004 11:27 AM (I/JDe)
5
As always I love how furryners think "cowboy" is a derogatory term.
Then again, in parts of America "European" is considered a derogatory term, but at least there's more historical and mythical precedence for that one.
Roy Rogers never started world wars.
Kalroy
Posted by: Kalroy at July 29, 2004 05:19 PM (q1aeu)
6
It appears that Canadian schools are teachng the same liberalism that infects U.S. schools. Liberals believe that they can do whatever they please when it suits their own particular needs. They absolutely fail to realize that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few...And it is the few, with their cacaphony of hatred, that are being allowed control of our nations. Hatred is an illogical emotion that motivates illogical behavior. "Fear leads to hate, and hate leads to the Dark Side." (Star Wars, Yoda). How does it feel to be governed by hatred Canada?
Posted by: Dr. Wm. Hayes at August 08, 2004 12:52 AM (1sZpi)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
#17
Several people have written me to point out that I made it all the way up to #17 on
John Hawkins' Top 40 Blogs. When I saw that, I was as flabbergasted as you! Oda Mae wrote in my comments section recently that I should be proud of the things I say on my blog, but I don't really think I'm all that interesting. I still can't believe
anyone reads my stuff, much less people like SGT Hook who are deployed and should have much higher priorities.
But anyway, people do come here, and I certainly appreciate it. Thanks for helping me try to grok.
Posted by: Sarah at
02:38 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 107 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Sarah,
I wish you could see yourself through my eyes, 'cause from this view, you're pretty damn cool. I can understand why everyone reads your site and loves it so much.
Posted by: Bush Lover at July 28, 2004 07:40 AM (Dh23Y)
2
Yay! As we would have said in the mid-90s, you go girl!
Posted by: Carla at July 28, 2004 10:55 AM (r5M6F)
3
Please don't let it go to your head.
I read your work as kinda, sorta letters from a friend who I don't write back to. Well, not often, anyway.
But if you start getting a swelled head about the people who do enjoy your writing, then you'll start trying to be "meaningful". And then I'll start feeling like I didn't understand anything that you wrote and maybe I wasn't really smart enough or good enough to be reading your stuff. And that will make me unhappy and I will stop reading and if everybody does that, then you'll be back to a core audience of ... ?
So don't worry about who is reading. Just keep doing what you been doing.
Cheers.
Posted by: homebru at July 28, 2004 12:30 PM (skKMo)
4
Sarah,
You are the only female whose weblog I read every day (most days twice). 8-}
Posted by: Ron - WI at July 28, 2004 11:37 PM (CwrQg)
5
Excellent and well-deserved. I think you grok pretty well.
Posted by: Jim at July 29, 2004 03:18 AM (BjDAE)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 27, 2004
COMEDY
My friend's husband bought a bootleg copy of Fahrencrap 9/11 in Iraq. He said he watched it three times and laughed his ass off the whole time. When I heard that, I managed a bemused smile: I'm amazed with this guy's confidence to laugh in Michael Moore's face. I've spent so much time getting angry about this movie that it was refreshing to hear that one soldier thought Fahrencrap 9/11 was a comedy.
Too bad not all soldiers are reacting the same way...
Michael Moore has never claimed to support the troops, but a lot of Americans who have gone to see this movie are the same ones who "support the troops but think the war was wrong". To those viewers, I say congratulations: you've now put $100 million in Moore's pocket and doubt and pessimism in our servicemembers' minds. Well done.
(via LGF)
Posted by: Sarah at
03:30 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 146 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Glad to know your husband thinks its funny.
"support the troops but think the war was wrong"
So what does that mean? You are inferring that the two can't be seperated? You mean I have to choose?
Did you like Starship Troopers?
I am rfidtag and I approve this message.
Posted by: rfidtag at July 27, 2004 10:53 AM (XxIKf)
2
My friend's husband. Read the details, please. And yes, as I've written before, I do think you have to choose.
Posted by: Sarah at July 27, 2004 11:41 AM (59JMC)
3
Hi. I found your blog through CPT Patti and I really enjoy reading it. I was very sad to read yesterday about the soldiers reaction to the Moore film. There are many articles that dispel the 'truths' in the film - I hope the soldiers who are dismayed find those and ease their minds.
I support the troops - with more than just words - I'm an adopt-a-friend to over 68 troops serving in Iraq.
I just didn't feel that saying 'I support the troops' was good enough. I wanted to teach my son about the soldiers and their families sacrifice for our freedom.
You can't be FOR the troops and AGAINST the war. The troops that are in Iraq know why we are there and they are seeing the fruits of their labor pay off.
Thanks for writing your blog and for being a great American (and your husband too). Without strong familiies back home like yours, our soldiers wouldn't have the support they truly need. GOD Bless America and our brave men and women.
Posted by: Kathleen A at July 27, 2004 09:39 PM (vnAYT)
4
Moore's film is responsible for emboldening our enemies, and as a result prolonging their resistance and the war. therefore, he's partly responsible for every death and kidnapping that occurs since his "documentary" was released.
To see O'Reilly shake his hand last night on TV made me sick. i've lost what little respect i had for O'Reilly, now. i never had any for Moore.
Posted by: annika at July 28, 2004 06:06 PM (zAOEU)
5
Please help me out here--I'm trying to wrap my brain around this, but I'm not having much luck with it.
You say that people who watch Moore's film are "sowing doubt and pessimism in our servicemembers' minds." Is it not possible that the very act of fighting in a war would cause doubt and pessimism to creep in, with or without any propaganda on either side?
Also, you mention that we must choose between "supporting the troops" and "being against the war." How far does that choice extend? Does that mean we are not allowed to criticize any detail of the strategy and prosecution of this war?
For instance, are we allowed to ask why our troops weren't given enough body and vehicle armor that families and towns had to donate them?
Are we allowed to question why control of some Iraqi cities have been turned over to what amounts to armed gangs?
Are we allowed to ask what the administration plans to do with the money each time it asks for a supplemental request for funding?
Can we entertain the possibility that everything isn't quite rosy in the midst of a combat zone, and that the challenges being faced are more complex and intractable than what we are being told?
Are we allowed to ask who is responsible for making the decisions in this war, and are we allowed to hold them accountable for their actions and decisions, just as we are held accountable for the decisions we make in our own lives?
If the answer isn't "yes" to these questions, then how are we living in a republic?
Posted by: Can't win at July 29, 2004 02:12 AM (gUA7O)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 26, 2004
CRIME
My German co-worker has insisted on several occasions that my American co-worker and I are much better off living in Europe than in the US because in Europe we're away from all the crime. Nevermind that my co-worker hails from Phoenix and I from central Illinois and that we've managed to steer pretty clear of crime. Nevermind that her view is skewed because her experience in the US is from living in Detroit. And nevermind that "the US is full of crime" is another one of those
lore statements that people toss around. In fact, England is pretty much screwed. (If you just want the money quote, head to
Rishon Rishon; the full set of articles can be found at
Steyn Online.) And nevermind that the most dangerous place I've ever lived was my neighborhood in France, where kids threatened to rape us in the phone booths and public masturbation was the norm. Creepy stuff.
Posted by: Sarah at
12:17 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 157 words, total size 1 kb.
1
On average there is more crime in the US than in Europe. Finland, the UK, and Denmark have more crime than the US, but all the other countries have lower crime stats; France (62.67 crimes per 1000 people) and Germany (76.02 crimes per 1000 people) have less crime than the US (81.55 crimes per 1000 people).
Rapes: US higher than any European country
Assaults: US higher than any European country
Car thefts: 5 european countries before the US
Murders: Ex-soviet countries before the US, then a gap, then the western European countries.
Burglaries: US does pretty good, 5 western european countries go before it.
(all stats per capita)
So, Germany and France have less crime than the US by any measure. The UK has more crime overall, but less of the more serious offences.
Still, 'all the crime' in such a large and diverse country is indeed a pretty vacuous statement.
(
source)
Posted by: Sander at July 26, 2004 01:11 PM (9v8mw)
2
What a crock. I've felt much more in danger in many European cities (especially in S. Italy) than most American ones. Also, what statistics like the one above always neglect to tell you is the info dealing with neighborhoods, etc. And yes, heh, Detroit would certainly skew things.
I live, as you know, on the South Side of Chicago--so spare me the "pampered" line. Yet I also grew up in an area where people to this day leave their cars unlocked with the keys in the seats...with the windows rolled down. Few places in Europe can really claim that.
Posted by: Jeremiah at July 26, 2004 01:55 PM (0FAew)
3
Yes, Jeremiah, that's what I was trying to say. Consider the reversal of your statement:
I've felt much more in danger in many American cities (especially Detroit or LA) than most European ones.Both can be 100% true, since crime in the subset of low-crime cities is always lower than crime in
most cities. It's true that some cities in Europe have more crime than some cities in the US, it's also true that some cities in the US have more crime than some cities in Europe. However, on average, there is more crime in the US. Simple as that.
Posted by: Sander at July 26, 2004 02:02 PM (9v8mw)
4
It's kind of apples and oranges. Europe is full of countries with only one "primate" city (a term i remember from an old urban geography course i took in undergrad) France has Paris, Spain has Madrid. (Admittedly, Germany has several major cities) So the better comparison would be between the major cities in the US vs. Europe's. Of course France would have lower crime, there's only one major city there. Anecdotally, i was very paranoid of petty crime when i visited Lisbon and Madrid two years ago, due to the large number of people hanging out in the public squares looking for suckers and tourists.
Posted by: annika at July 26, 2004 04:11 PM (zAOEU)
5
Annika,
Spain has 2 multimillion cities (Madrid and Barcelona)
France has 1 (Paris)
Britain has 1 (London, although Birmingham is near a million)
Germany has 3 (Berlin, Hamburg and München)
The US has 9.
If you divide number of multimillion cities by the total population there doesn't seem to be a correlation between population distribution and crime.
(Source:
CityPopulation)
Posted by: Sander at July 26, 2004 08:31 PM (3nJmx)
6
But the city I lived in in France wasn't Paris, it was Angers, population 140,000, which is just a bit bigger than Peoria, IL...
Posted by: Sarah at July 27, 2004 09:58 AM (vLXDh)
7
Yea, living in/near Detroit will skew anybodys perception of crime.
I live in a Detroit suburb (all my life) and I carry those thoughts everywhere we go, thinking any big city will be just as bad but we haven't gone to any big city and had any problems. We have had problems going into Detroit for events. I will not go into the city unless I know I will be out before dusk.
Haven't seen statistics for after April, but January through April there was the equivalant of 1 murder per day.
Posted by: Machelle at July 27, 2004 10:01 AM (ZAyoW)
8
I live in Birmingham Uk and I felt much safer walking around Chicago on a recent trip than I do here.
John, Birmingham, Uk.
Posted by: John Hammond at August 08, 2005 10:42 PM (iJrCL)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
129kb generated in CPU 0.0432, elapsed 0.1422 seconds.
62 queries taking 0.1101 seconds, 317 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.