How's your laser beam this year?

Posted by: Sarah at 04:41 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 10 words, total size 1 kb.

I could use some advice on behalf of a reader who contacted me with an perplexing dilemma. This reader was conducting interviews at his job and interviewed an Egyptian man who set off a couple of warning bells. This Egyptian seemed "jittery and anxious" and became agitated when he learned that this particular job would not get him maximum money pronto; the man said that he was only planning on being in the country for a short time and needed to make as much money as possible as fast as he could. This reader couldn't help but shake the feeling of "terrorist" that was creeping in. The reader doesn't want to be "racist" but also doesn't want to be caught wishing he'd done something (like those who met Atta and got a bad feeling). The reader wonders if he should report this, and to whom.

So what do you think? Is it better to be safe than sorry, or is it intrusive to potentially shake up someone's life on nothing better than a hunch? I'd appreciate as much input as any of you can give me as to what you'd honestly do if you were in this reader's shoes. He needs our help.

Posted by: Sarah at 03:53 PM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 205 words, total size 1 kb.

Interesting discussion on subtle racism at Annika's
Interesting article on "the story that no one is reporting" about Katrina

Posted by: Sarah at 03:50 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 21 words, total size 1 kb.

Wanna see some photos of white people cackling and rubbing their hands together as black people drown in New Orleans? Sorry, I don't have any. All I've got are these photos of human beings helping each other.

Posted by: Sarah at 03:30 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 39 words, total size 1 kb.

I'm not sure I think it's very fair that the New Orleans police worked their butts off for a week and now want paid vacation since the national guard showed up. The guardsmen were brought home early from Iraq, which means they've been working their butts off for a year. And the police get the all-expense paid vacations?

My husband worked every day around the clock for nine months before he was allowed two weeks of R&R, which were deducted from his vacation days. And the police can't work at this pace for one week before they need time off?

Apparently they need some days at home to sift through all the loot they stole from Wal-Mart.

Posted by: Sarah at 03:10 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 119 words, total size 1 kb.

This summer, with no job and a puppy to watch, I have done a lot of knitting. I never thought there was such a thing as too much knitting, but apparently there is. I have been having dull pains in my forearms, and both my index fingers are shot: I made a puncture wound in my left index with a 4.0 cm, and I have a rugburn-like callous on my right from holding the yarn. My husband has put me on the disabled list: no knitting for at least two days. And I was gonna start these gloves for my dad, perfect for his two favorite hobbies (cigars and fishing).

What do you do with your free time if you're not knitting?

Posted by: Sarah at 11:42 AM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 124 words, total size 1 kb.

It seems at least one commenter thinks I write about President Bush too often. The explanation is quite simple really: the reason I write about him is because I think about him all the time. There are three men who dominate my life, three men whose respect I work hard to earn every day: President Bush, Bunker, and CPT Sims. In every action and every thought, I consistently weigh how these three men would judge me. Am I doing something that would make them slap sense into me, or would they be proud of me? You don't have to understand this, but it's a big part of what keeps me trying to be a better person every day.

So I'll quit glorifying our President when the other half of the world stops vilifying him.

Posted by: Sarah at 05:48 AM | Comments (19) | Add Comment
Post contains 138 words, total size 1 kb.

1 It is understandable that you are trying to compensate for the external pressure. One has to be careful though not to overcompensate - one would no longer be oneself but just an inverted reflection of the environment. Best wishes (and keep up the good work with your blog!)

Posted by: John Bull at September 06, 2005 07:05 AM (Kdv3T)

2 sarah what amazes me as a spouse of an active-duty serviceman you support this clown.if bush 43 and cronies had it their way there will be more deployment in small FOB places like bulgaria,central asia,etc and damned the servicemembers family.and also i'm shocked that you support a man if he had his way he would overturn roe v wade.like the f*****g government has a right to tell you what you can or can not do with your body.

Posted by: tommy at September 06, 2005 08:50 AM (NMK3S)

3 And thanks to tommy for highlighting Sarah's point in case anyone had missed it.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at September 06, 2005 08:56 AM (QriEg)

4 Tommy, you need to understand that a LOT of people in the military like Bush and dislike Clinton. Not all for the same reason. Bush is a far more pro-military president and has shown much more respect for the military. That is a personal level kind of thing. Heck, most of my union brothers support Bush and I've heard less vitriolic Demo-hating from Sean Hannity (though far worse from Dems) and they're all Democrats. So....... Kalroy

Posted by: Kalroy at September 06, 2005 10:45 AM (AwOS7)

5 kalroy that's what i find so amazing.bush 43 has been trying to CUT veteran benefits in a time of war.and the base closings.and the stop-loss orders.and the IRR call ups.and this fancy new robocop type 21st century star-wars garbage.and that's just the military i won't even get started on his domestic policies.why do the troops like him so much it's obvious he tells them what they want to hear.wraps himself in patriotic rhetoric.and tells them they're doing great work(which most of them are)if he had it his way entirely he would outsource more money and jobs to the private contractors.just something to keep in mind.

Posted by: tommy at September 06, 2005 11:19 AM (NMK3S)

6 Thank you so much Sarah. I have an active-duty son in the Army who is scheduled to ship out Iraq the last of Sept. He loves his country, his God, and his president. So what if Pres. Bush has made some mistakes? Oh my gosh, I guess it's true then, he is human. If he was slow to react to Katrina, I'm sure of one thing. It wasn't because he has a Monica in the Oval Office and couldn't be disturbed!

Posted by: kimberly at September 06, 2005 11:55 AM (/Whm2)

7 I just want to say thanks for remaining unmoved by disapproval of your opinions about the President and military. It's a hard thing to support both/any of those, and I respect you for being both honest and firm. I read your blog frequently. I plan to enlist in the Marine Corps next fall and am eager to serve in Iraq. I've gotten huge amounts of flak about this from my family, teachers, and other people I respect. When I enlist, I'll be pointing my Corps sisters to your journal, saying "here, at least, is someone who appears to be on our side."

Posted by: mick at September 06, 2005 02:08 PM (02rmn)

8 Kimberly & Mick -- it means a lot to hear you say that. I thought I'd get a lot of flak for this post, so it's nice to hear that others understand. And any time I feel like the pressure is too great, like people are getting me down and making me feel bad about myself, I just think that President Bush gets out of bed every day, even though there are posters of him with Hitler's mustache. He's one of the strongest men I can think of. (And Bunker's one of the smartest and CPT Sims is one of the most honorable.)

Posted by: Sarah at September 06, 2005 03:55 PM (7+dr0)

9 Just curious: Would you describe Bush as one of the smartest and most honorable men you know? Especially smartest. It is hard for me to believe that anyone could really be in awe of the man. Even if you agree with the majority of his decisions, on a personal level he seems like such an insipid echo of Reagan, with whom he is usually compared. I was watching old video of Reagan the other day, and whatever you might think about his politics, the man was an incredibly powerful speaker. He had a commanding presence, real gravitas. When Bush speaks, the word "lightweight" just forces itself into your mind. His one Presidential moment was the speech right after 9/11; that was very well done. Normally, though, he can't say more than a few words at a time without pausing, even right in the middle of a sentence where no pause is appropriate, and he says the most serious things as if he is just about to laugh... I'm not going to descend to calling him stupid, because no one really stupid gets elected President. But even if we were going to have a president from the conservative wing of the Republican party, couldn't we have had one who looks and acts like a President? Next to Bush, even someone like Trent Lott looks presidential. And while W. may not have been getting a Monica during the hurricane, can we really be sure that he hadn't been felled by yet another killer pretzel?

Posted by: Pericles at September 06, 2005 05:31 PM (EpPuP)

10 Sarah, Stick to your values - you have thought things through, and you are as entitled to your views as anyone. (Just another one of the rights our military sacrifices so much to protect!) To those who want to question W's esteemed position on her list of 3, I am sure Sarah can speak for herself quite well. But one thing that has not been pointed out is that W has a strong sense of what is right. He makes decisions and sticks with them, despite the support and backlash which are both inevitable in our open society. And he has a moral compass that is constant. This is a real draw. I may not agree with him all the time, but I sure can predict what his position will be, and I can rely on him to stay the course. Intestinal fortitude is a much rarer commodity than we think these days, and I value it. Thanks, Sarah, for being so willing to share your views, even when you expect to get push back. It is a sign that you have the same type of character that I admire - regardless of political views.

Posted by: jck at September 06, 2005 07:35 PM (J9ixV)

11 Pericles - Bush isn't a great speaker. But I'd rather have a President who does what he says, than a President who makes compelling speeches and then doesn't do anything. tommy - Your keyboard has a shift key and a space bar. Find them and use them. If your keyboard doesn't have a shift key and a space bar, your can cut and paste some of these: ABCDEFGHIJKLM NOPQRSTUVWXYZ. Oh, and here are some commas for you as well: ,,,,,, Hope that helps.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at September 06, 2005 07:43 PM (QriEg)

12 Pixy and jck- Thanks for ytour comments. jck raises a fair point about Bush's constancy, but surely there is a golden mean between "blowing in the wind" on the one hand and sheer pigheadedness on the other. Bush depicted Kerry as being at one extreme, but isn't he at the other? Pixy makes a fair point, too; there are things more important than eloquence and bearing. Of course we want a President who follows through and what he or she promises, to the exent this is possible. With all of the people in the country, though, couldn't we find someone with ALL of the qualities we want? Besides, does Bush really follow through on what he promises? You may be focusing on foreign policy, but what about "compassionate conservatism." A lot of the programs he talked about have received far less funding than he pledged: No Child Left Behind, fighting AIDS in Africa, etc. Closer to foreign policy, remember how he went from saying that he would fire anyone who leaked Plame's identity to saying that he would fire anyone who committed a crime? He isn't really as steadfast as the two of you suggest.

Posted by: Pericles at September 06, 2005 08:17 PM (EpPuP)

13 "kalroy that's what i find so amazing.bush 43 has been trying to CUT veteran benefits in a time of war.and the base closings.and the stop-loss orders.and the IRR call ups.and this fancy new robocop type 21st century star-wars garbage." Tommy, I call BS on all of that. First off, elementary school civics lesson; CONGRESS has power of the purse, not the President. Blame congress. Secondly, the stop loss and IRR call ups were neccessary during the first Gulf war. It is more necessary due to the post Cold War cuts. If you want to blame anyone for the military cuts it has been a bi-partisan effort on the part of congress. You do realize that the majority effort, however, has been on the part of the Democrats; many of whom support the military, but a large, vocal part is actively anti-military and have been calling for far more draconian cuts than were made under Clinton (during both the Republican congress and more so during the Democrat congress). You're going to have to realize that though their are exceptions on both sides, the Democrats EARNED their anti-military reputation through both word and deed. Kalroy

Posted by: Kalroy at September 06, 2005 09:39 PM (9RG5y)

14 Kalroy- Remember that those military cuts started during Bush I. It was called the Peace Dividend back then... we won the Cold War so we didn't need as large of a military force. There is an element of BS to the "Congress has the power of the purse" argument anyway. Everyone knows that the president has a lot of influence here also. If the prez. puts something in the initial budget proposal, fights hard for it, but Congress still strikes it, then okay, the responsibility belongs to Congress. Otherwise, it isn't so clear.

Posted by: Pericles at September 06, 2005 09:48 PM (EpPuP)

15 With all of the people in the country, though, couldn't we find someone with ALL of the qualities we want? Well, clearly not.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at September 06, 2005 10:10 PM (RbYVY)

16 If you want to blame anyone for the military cuts it has been a bi-partisan effort on the part of congress. With Republicans holding majorities in both chambers? Bi-partisan doesn't mean one party doing things in two different branches of the government.

Posted by: Visitor at September 07, 2005 02:04 PM (ztSQc)

17 Hint to "Visitor": The military cuts started over a decade ago.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at September 07, 2005 07:07 PM (QriEg)

18 Sarah, I think about Bunker very often, too, and go to his page just to click on the link, a lot. You're a good egg: keep up the fire. Paulie

Posted by: Paulie at The Commons at September 09, 2005 10:18 PM (SWi7L)

19 I, too, think of Bunker daily. I sure do miss him... Another military family here who supports Bush. Husband and I both think Bush is a good leader. Personally, I think he's too big of a spender (my libertarian leanings showing) and should have vetoed SOMETHING by now lol. However, when it comes to defending this nation, I trust him. I thank God that Gore wasn't in office on September 11th. All we needed was another president who lead by polls and focus groups as that idiot Clinton did.

Posted by: Shannon at September 13, 2005 11:08 PM (sHJxX)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I bought the husband the extended Lord of the Rings trilogy for his birthday, and we watched the movies again for the first time since the movie theater. As I watched preparations for the battle of Helms Deep, I told my husband that there's no way they would've herded me into the cellar. I couldn't imagine sending my husband and son off to fight while I stayed underground. The only exercise my arms get is knitting, but I would've fought, struggled to lift a sword, even though it surely would've meant death at the hands of an orc. But I would've had to try, had to fight.

Hey, maybe I'm a sheepdog.

Posted by: Sarah at 03:39 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 114 words, total size 1 kb.

Daily Kos said that Hurricane Katrina was worse than 9/11. I believe Charles Johnson is right in saying that some people want nothing more than to downplay what happened to our country that day. There's no comparison between 9/11 and a natural disaster.

Look into this man's eyes. He flew an airplane into a building in a calculated and deliberate attempt to kill as many Americans as possible. He worked hard, studied hard, and trained to attack the United States and leave death in his wake. He is a monster and a nothing.

To intentionally compare what he did on that infamous September morn to what happened in New Orleans is beyond my comprehension. Deliberate murder is not really the same as dropping the ball during a natural disaster. There will be time yet for a hundred visions and revisions once the chaos of Hurricane Katrina has subsided, but right now people need to focus more on working for the present and future instead of pointing fingers into the past.

Unfortunately, this poor man is once again being blamed for everything. The way some people are jawing, you'd think President Bush borrowed Halle Berry's white wig and conjured up a big storm to try to kill him some black people. Or that if he'd only signed Kyoto as zee Germans told him he should, the hurricane would've been avoided. News flash: President Bush is not to blame for everything bad that happens in this world.

Varifrank wonders why anyone in his right mind would ever, ever, ever want to be president. President Bush acts pre-emptively and he's blasted for not waiting on the UN. He waits for his advisors on Katrina and he's blasted for not acting quickly enough. Last time he was suppsed to drop My Pet Goat and run into the burning buildings himself. And then sit around and wait for Hans Blix for another few years. And apparently now he should've immediately flown down to Louisiana with "a hundred helicopters dumping concrete blocks, crushed cars, barges, and anything else they could get, into the breach" to save the day.

What happened in New Orleans is terrible: Mother Nature can be a bitch, no doubt. But the only thing that Katrina has in common with 9/11 is that neither of them were President Bush's fault.

As Ben Stein says, Get Off His Back.

MORE TO GROK:

Porretto also said it better than I could:

I applaud DubyaÂ’s election, re-election, and his overall performance in office because I am persuaded, by everything IÂ’ve learned about his conduct, both in full view of the cameras and in less well publicized settings, that he is an honest man. He says what he means, to the best of his ability to express it, and does what he says heÂ’ll do, to the best of his ability to do it. The probability that his successor will be as honest and responsible is vanishingly small; consider the list of candidates for his position and see if you can disagree.

Yet this honest, sincere, remarkably generous and gentle man, who rose against savage opposition to the most powerful, most scrutinized, most pressured office on Earth, is subject to carping from all sides. Some of it is more vicious than any American public figure has ever endured. Some of it is based, not on his actual conduct, efforts, or results, but on his criticsÂ’ dislike of his priorities. And some of it, tragically, is emanating from the very persons who claim to hold those priorities themselves.

Posted by: Sarah at 06:56 AM | Comments (20) | Add Comment
Post contains 594 words, total size 4 kb.

Since all I've done this summer is knit and make sure the dog isn't chewing on the coffee table, I've been fairly productive. The sweater on the left is for the husband, and the other two are for me. I'm nearly done with a fourth, a plain white one. (I hate how photos always make my work look like those Magic Eye posters.)

Also via Zabibbo is Good, here's a humorous account from a man who lives with a knitter:

Living with a knitter is not easy. To which degree varies based on the knitter's personality as knitters come in all flavors. The sociological kind is common, to which knitting is a crusade, the polarized kind, to which an SKP and a K2TOG are mutually exclusive, the helping type, which needs to help you even when you never asked for help and the guru type, which only lives in Nepal. Some knitters are militant to their partner, which is, they want their mate to be involved. This can develop in requesting for help winding a hank (which can have catastrophic results), help choosing color and design (which turns into masochism easily) and can go as far as outsourcing a design to the mate. The latter, technically called "black hole initiative" is definitely hairy business and can go as far as what is known as "annihilation", don't try it if you are the Romantic type.

I suppose I'm somewhere between sociological and polarized. I have asked my husband for advice, wherein he makes something up and then realizes later that I was serious. I stopped asking. I have offered to teach him, but I think he wants to keep the mystery of knitting a mystery: as he said once, "You know, I have no idea what it is you're doing. You click those sticks together and a sweater comes out."

And SKP is most certainly different from K2TOG.

Posted by: Sarah at 06:00 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 321 words, total size 2 kb.

Found a set of questions via a knit blog, Zibibbo is Good. She's a knitter who reads LGF, and she'd like to make buttons that say Knitters Against Global Jihad but thinks that no one would buy them. Uh, hello? I've got three customers right here in Germany (my two best friends and I) who'd take them in a heartbeat.

10 years ago I was starting my senior year of high school. I thought I knew everything, and I thought that talking on the phone to my boyfriend was more important than calculus. That's why my husband sat down and did a calc problem cold yesterday and I stared at him blankly.

5 years ago I was starting my first year of grad school, dating my husband long distance and realizing that most people, myself included, don't know the first thing about real learning.

1 year ago I was traveling to France with my mother, breaking my vow to never return to that country.

Yesterday I watched "We Interrupt This Program" in From the Earth to the Moon with my husband, and then we had pie and talked about it. "It's just when I see a really good movie I really like to go out and get some pie and talk about it."

Posted by: Sarah at 04:50 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 215 words, total size 1 kb.

The other day, I noticed something...unusual...in Charlie's poop. I could not figure out what it was or where he had gotten it. Until today. I put it all together five minutes ago when I remembered that in one of his frantic runs down the hall, he knocked over our American flag (we keep it inside during dark and rain). What I saw in his poop was the wing of the eagle that tops our flagpole. Good heavens, that must've hurt on the way out.

Posted by: Sarah at 10:58 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 86 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Ah...the wonderful world of dog owneership

Posted by: Mare at September 01, 2005 08:36 PM (KmNMw)

2 I don't even want to think about it!

Posted by: Pixy Misa at September 02, 2005 04:57 AM (RbYVY)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Holy smokes -- our gas just jumped 18 cents overnight.
I thought we were getting oil out of this war...

Posted by: Sarah at 10:46 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 22 words, total size 1 kb.

I once dated a boy with a confusing value system. His philosophy on stealing was that if you don't safeguard your belongings, you deserve to have them stolen. He absolved the thief of wrongdoing and placed the responsibility of ownership squarely on the owner. If a store didn't have security cameras, how could thieves be blamed for taking advantage of such a system? I quickly realized that he and I would never have common ground and that the relationship was doomed to fail. How can you possibly build when mommy says stealing is bad and daddy says it's OK? There was no future in that relationship.

I was reminded of him yesterday as I watched the footage of the looting in New Orleans. I cannot fathom what was going through those people's minds. What made them think that it was acceptable to steal merchandise just because the windows were broken? In whose worldview is it OK to steal during a national tragedy? In a time when all feared for their lives, individuals were cashing in on misery.

CNN currently has a poll up: "Can looting be defended by neccessity?" Right now, the vote is split 45/55% towards No. But the problem is that many people weren't stealing out of necessity. We're not talking Jean Valjean and his loaf of bread here; we're talking cash and jewelery.

Looting broke out in some New Orleans neighborhoods, prompting authorities to send more than 70 additional officers and an armed personnel carrier into the city. One police officer was shot in the head by a looter, but was expected to recover, said Sergeant Paul Accardo, a police spokesman.

On New Orleans' Canal Street, dozens of looters ripped open the steel gates on clothing and jewelry stores and grabbed merchandise. In Biloxi, Mississippi, people picked through casino slot machines for coins and ransacked other businesses.

Someone shot a policeman in the head over this. That is not necessity; that is greed. That is stealing, justified in someone's warped mind because The Man was too busy saving lives to guard the stores.

That's disgusting.

Posted by: Sarah at 05:37 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 350 words, total size 2 kb.