NEVER EVEN CROSSED MY MIND
I swear on a stack of Bibles that, throughout this whole boring thing, I never once realized that Tiger Woods only cheats with white ladies. Not once. Not until Noah Sheppard pointed out how ticked the black community is about it.
1
Are they pissed he's married to a white woman as well?
Posted by: Beth at December 07, 2009 10:23 AM (ZT9NN)
2
*sigh* I'll swear right with ya... my goodness. *sigh* This story would be funny if it what it indicated about the social dynamic in this country weren't so frightening...
Posted by: Krista at December 07, 2009 12:19 PM (sUTgZ)
3
An old vaudeville joke goes, "that's no lady, that's my wife." In this case it is that's no lady.......
Posted by: Ruth H at December 07, 2009 02:11 PM (JFseb)
4Well, luckily there’s no racism in Black America…wow.
Posted by: tim at December 07, 2009 04:23 PM (CnABi)
5
Funny, I don't see the Asian community getting upset since technically Tiger is more Asian than he is black, and it has yet to be seen if any of his mistresses are Asian or Black. And aren't Asian women by a landslide more desired by men from a sexual conquest standpoint across all races of women. Gee, sounds like Tiger is denying his Asian heritage because he didn't have a catalog of mistresses that expanded more cultures than a United States of Benetton ad.
And who's to say he hasn't slept with a black or asian woman - the mistresses are STILL coming out of the woodwork like moths to a flame. And then who's to say any of these recent mistresses are legitimate?
People's ability to not think before they speak amaze me. Glad to see they're upset for the "right" reasons and that the "racism card" isn't being mindlessly assigned in an irrelevant manner. Pffffffffff, what a freakin' joke.
According to an article from Salon, Tiger Woods on the Oprah show about his race:
And then Tiger Woods said he wasn't actually "black" at all -- he was "Cablinasian."
Woods made his remarks on "Oprah,"
when he was asked if it bothered him to be called an African-American.
"It does," he said. "Growing up, I came up with this name: I'm a
'Cablinasian.'" As in Caucasian-black-Indian-Asian.
Posted by: BigD78 at December 07, 2009 10:42 PM (q+uNZ)
Posted by: Homefront Six at December 08, 2009 07:16 PM (umhCJ)
8
I have not been keeping up with this...but as a non whore, married white lady in her almost 40's, I am sort of pissed off that Tiger only hooks up with whores, that are single in 20 something with lots of eye makeup and fake tans...
Posted by: awtm at December 09, 2009 12:00 PM (IfqPB)
9
After comments from a coworker yesterday I finally gave in and read the articles on Tiger today...amazed to find so many stepping forward to claim concubine status. I hope some of these are merely opportunist seeking in some warped, twisted way to get a personal bounce (or check) out of this, but time will tell.
Sarah - how right you are. The skin color of these women didn't occur to me either, not at all, not in the least.
The fact that it is an issue highlights a theory I've held for years. Simply put, and in general terms, black people are usually WAY more concerned that they are black than I am. Typically, I just don't care...and I credit Christianity and the Army with my being there.
Jesse says the congressman can't call himself a black man while I see a man of conscience.
Among some, Tiger isn't criticized for cheating...he's criticized for cheating with women of the wrong color.
See...the thing is, I got to Dr. King's dream a long time ago. I'm totally willing to judge a man by the content of his character. However, if I criticize said man about his character and said man is black, well, among many, suddenly it isn't about his character, it is about my "racism."
I happen to think the President is among the most narcissistic, megalomaniacal, incompetent and boorish boobs on the planet; an opinion that has squat to do with his being (half) black, and all to do with the fact he is a flaming socialist who appears to loathe the USA while he squanders every good relationship, especially with Great Britain, this country has, is spending this country into Hell, and doesn't have the sense God gave a house cat to realize that government never made anything better or more efficient. Ahem....THAT, ladies and gentlemen, is my assessment of the content of his character.
But let me say that in public and I will be the InstaRacist. The fact that I happen to think similar thoughts about Pelosi, Reid and Boxer goes uncredited due to the troubling fact that I happen to be of the same skin color as these three. Presumably I get credit for judging them by the content of their character...if their apologists give credit for such things in the first place.
So...to step back into the clubhouse as we make the turn, the sad point here is that I sincerely don't care what your skin color is, nor does it register with me what your mistress' skin color is. If you think I do, I know for a certainty the problem doesn't reside with me. I was married to my Asian wife for months before either of us realized we are, by definition, a "mixed marriage".
The issue is "skin color first". And for me I have a long list of things that matter more to me than skin color. To put it delicately, it would appear that many don't.
I challenge anyone reading this to tell my why voting FOR a man because he is black or white or latino is any less racist than voting AGAINST him because he is black or white or latino. Recognize, though, if you accept that challenge you would have to then explain 96 percent of blacks voting for Obama without race being a player in the debate.
As for Tiger...dude, you are an awesome golfer. And I admire your refusal to play to the race-first crowd by acknowledging and celebrating all your ancestors. But, frankly, it would seem you screwed up.
While I'd like to think I could behave better because I adore my amazingly wonderful wife, I can't promise I would. Because unlike you I don't face the temptation of beautiful women throwing themselves at me. I'm a pudgy guy with little money and no high-profile talent, so we don't actually ever get to judge the content of my character regarding would-be mistresses who like rich, fit, talented men. So I don't claim to be better than you, just fortunate I don't have to make the choices.
But one thing is certain: The only choice I wish you hadn't made is cheating. Your choice in mistress skin color never crossed my mind. I'm still naively surprised that it did others'.
Posted by: LTC Fitz at December 10, 2009 12:19 AM (9gvAW)
10
I've been ignoring Tiger Woods' affairs. I find the public reaction to them to be marginally more interesting than the affairs themselves.
BigD78 wrote,
Funny, I don't see the Asian community getting upset since technically
Tiger is more Asian than he is black [...]
With marginal exceptions among activist types (e.g., kevin's Golden Pacifist Omerican coalition), there is no "Asian community" analogous to the American black community. Koreans do not see themselves as part of the same group as Japanese, much less Pakistanis. So my guess is that non-activist Asians don't care any more about this than other Americans. I wonder if Thai-Americans (or Thai in general) see Tiger as 'one of them'.
I don't even know for sure how representative the 'black community' reactions in the media are. Too often 'community' in the media simply means 'talkative ethnic activist' or 'random nonpresentative person'. I'd be inclined to take a survey of black opinions on Woods more seriously than a few quotes.
Posted by: Amritas at December 13, 2009 06:18 PM (dWG01)
[Blanche] Lincoln will have another day in the spotlight tomorrow when her own
amendment — to cut the tax breaks on the salaries of health-insurance
company executives — will come up for a vote. The money saved from her
proposal, she says, will go toward Medicare. Her gist: Cut tax breaks
for big-bad execs and save Medicare.
How dare she? I mean, really that's all I can muster on this one.
This is a prime example of why we need a flat or Fair tax. So Congress can't fiddle with who pays taxes and who doesn't based on their own personal agenda or who it's popular to hate at the moment. Just because it's fashionable to hate insurance companies right now doesn't mean that their bosses should have to pay more taxes than the bosses of, say, Google, which we've already seen makes more profit than health insurance companies.
Of all the nerve. Really. This blatant populism makes me sick.
What she has proposed isn't precisely to increase taxes on h/c insurance execs compensation, but rather to limit the tax deductability of these salaries *to the company*.
Unbelievably demagogic statement on her web site:
"The choice on my amendment is simple. Either you support revenues being placed in the Medicare Trust Fund, or you support the IRS sending a check to health insurance companies to subsidize the multimillion dollar compensation packages of their executives."
So, letting people & companies keep the money they've earned is now defined as "subsidizing" them. No one should think that this attitude applies only to senior executives...sooner or later, the Dems will get around to applying it to *you*.
An individual flat tax, though, wouldn't stop this, since it's proposed as part of the corporate tax rather than individual tax. (And I think flat tax for corporations is probably conceptually infeasible) The solution is to get morons like Blanche Lincoln out of Congress.
Posted by: david foster at December 06, 2009 11:18 AM (DnrQl)
2
David -- Thanks for clearing that up for me. The way I understood it was different than you've explained. But that statement on her website is appalling for different reasons, but no less appalling.
Posted by: Sarah at December 06, 2009 12:32 PM (gWUle)
If CongressCreatures want to focus on excecutive salaries, how about they start with the "nonprofit" industry--which includes, but is not limited to, education. These institutions get *a lot* of tax benefits, and many of them also get lots of $$$ in direct government funding.
And a lot of their executives are VERY well-paid...indeed, it seems like the present definition of a "nonprofit" organization is simply that there are no pesky shareholders with whom one has to share the loot...
Posted by: david foster at December 06, 2009 05:48 PM (XkP51)
WHO'S DELAYING JUSTICE?
Holder has some nerve. From Marc Thiessen:
Only after KSM had been exhausted as an intelligence source did President Bush transfer him and 13 other terrorists to Guantanamo Bay,
Cuba, for trial by military commission. Once the legal obstacles had
been cleared in 2008, the commissions finally got underway. And when
they did, KSM and his co-conspirators all offered to plead guilty
before a military commission and proceed straight to execution.
With his decision to send them to civilian court, Holder has
effectively rejected KSM's guilty plea and told him, "No, Mr. Mohammed,
first let us give you that stage you wanted in New York to rally
jihadists, spread propaganda, and incite new attacks." Indeed, a lawyer
for one of the detainees has said that all five intend to plead not guilty
"so they can have a trial and try to get their message out." Were it
not for Holder, they'd be on death row instead of preparing for a trial
that will take years and make the O.J. Simpson case look like a traffic court hearing. And Holder chastises President Bush for delaying justice for 9/11 families?
1
I wonder if accepting his guilty plea and setting him up for execution would have been giving him and his ilk exactly what they wanted in making him a martyr. Seems to me there are downsides to each decision. I'm not excusing Holder, Obama, or any of the rest of them. I just don't see any choices that are completely acceptable.
Posted by: HomefrontSix at November 24, 2009 03:03 PM (umhCJ)
2
I agree that KSM wants martyrdom and that execution would give him what he wants. But giving him a stage in New York is also giving him what he wants. What are the alternatives? Detaining him for life at taxpayer expense? The jihadists could still use him for propaganda. So yes, "there are downsides to each decision." The enemy can exploit any outcome. Which of the worst outcomes is the best for us?
Posted by: Amritas at November 24, 2009 03:20 PM (+nV09)
3
"And Holder chastises President Bush for delaying justice for 9/11 families?"
A-fucking-MEN!!!! to that statement. I seriously think L. Graham was on to something when he exposed that Holder and Obama are trying to criminalize the war. KSM can now plead not guilty by reason of insanity and Holder/Obama have the audacity to proclaim the outcome of the trial. Since when did we become Iran or the Soviet Union. I didn't know civilian court cases w/ due process had pre-determined verdicts. Gollygee wilickers!!!!
Posted by: BigD78 at November 25, 2009 09:55 AM (FFrzN)
Since when did we become Iran or the Soviet Union.
We became the USSA on November 4, 2008.
I didn't know civilian court cases w/ due process had pre-determined verdicts.
Due process is so old school. Now we have duh process. Where is Omerica's Andrei Vyshinsky?
In 1935 he became Prosecutor General of the USSR, the legal mastermind of Joseph Stalin's Great Purge. He is widely cited for the principle that "confession of the accused is the queen of evidence". His monograph that justifies this postulate, Theory of Judicial Proofs in Soviet Justice, was awarded the Stalin Prize in 1947. He was the prosecutor at the Moscow Trials of the Great Purge, lashing its defenseless victims with vituperative, sometimes cruelly witty rhetoric:
"Shoot these rabid dogs. Death to this gang who hide their ferocious teeth, their eagle claws, from the people! Down with that vulture Trotsky, from whose mouth a bloody venom drips, putrefying the great ideals of Marxism!... Down with these abject animals! Let's put an end once and for all to these miserable hybrids of foxes and pigs, these stinking corpses! Let's exterminate the mad dogs of capitalism, who want to tear to pieces the flower of our new Soviet nation! Let's push the bestial hatred they bear our leaders back down their own throats!"
Of course, the Omerican Vyshinsky would never speak of KSM in such terms. No, he would reserve his full verbal force for the truly deserving.
Posted by: kevin at November 25, 2009 07:41 PM (ogTuw)
FOR THEE BUT NOT FOR ME
Via Instapundit, who says, "A rule under which only politicians have guns strikes me as the worst of all possible worlds."
Chicago politicians are zealously
committed to gun control in law but fairly relaxed about it in
practice.
In 1994, State Sen. Rickey Hendon had an unregistered handgun
stolen from his home in a burglary, and he didn't feign
contrition about his disregard of the ordinance.
"I have a right to protect myself," he declared, noting that he
had been burglarized before—and forgetting that the state
legislature of which he is a member allows Illinois cities to
deprive their citizens of that right. Asked if he would replace
the lost piece, Hendon said, "No comment." The police were kind
enough not to charge him.
U.S. Sen. Roland Burris, another Chicagoan, has endorsed a
nationwide ban on handguns and, in 1993, organized Chicago's
first Gun Turn-in Day. But the following year, while running
unsuccessfully for governor, he admitted he owned a handgun—"for
protection," he explained—and hadn't seen fit to turn it in along
with those other firearms. Lesser mortals apparently can protect
themselves with forks and spoons.
So they write gun laws for the peons and have no intention of following the laws themselves. Politicians are a real piece of work.
Posted by: airforcewife at November 23, 2009 09:44 PM (uE3SA)
2
AFW, once again we agree! We are DIFFERENT. We are dominant!
In a perfect world that will be achieved through liberalism real soon now, there will be no more guns.
But in this imperfect world, Congresspersyns of the One Party are under perpetual threat from Republikulaks. Those who defend the masses' birthright to handouts must also have the right to defend themselves from those who don't believe in freebies. If the Rightist fanatics go rogue and harm our health care heroes, they'll never be able to pass the greatest bill in Omerican history - which of course won't affect them:
One of the most outrageous parts of Obamacare is that government
employees, politicians, and union employees are EXEMPT from it and will
continue to get their golden benefit packages. The GOP should have a
good ad out on this and be running it 1000 times a day on TV. If there
is anything people hate, it’s being told they are “less worthy†than
others.
Posted by: kevin at November 24, 2009 02:31 AM (ogTuw)
RIGGING THE GAME
So, I'm trying to understand this, really. The prison at Guantanamo is illegal and illegitimate, but Obama and Holder saying we'll try these men in NYC and, duh, of course they'll be convicted and will never be released...that's somehow more legitimate?
I heard someone on TV say, and I'm sorry I don't know who, that we all kinda thought OJ Simpson would be convicted too. Heh.
The whole point of a fair trial is that the person has a chance of being acquitted. If there is no chance of being acquitted, if the game is rigged from the outset, then there is no point in having a trial. So if you're going to guarantee that KSM will be convicted, you can't have a trial. It's simple. You cannot guarantee the outcome of a trial. If you do, it's a farce. And if we're setting all this up to be a farce, just leave them at Gitmo.
That's my major problem with this idea. But Lindsey Graham also brings up another facet of the issue that's just as troubling.
(And I agree with Goldberg that, "For those of us frustrated with Graham, this makes up for a lot." Heh.)
1
Does it disturb anyone else that the AG is wholly unprepared to discuss this topic with any depth or clarity? And, this is the man we're trusting to craft the arguments that are going to 'guarantee' a conviction of KSM. I mean, KSM already has a nickname...that's bad.
Also bad? Providing him with Constitutional rights equal to our own.
Even more bad? Creating a situation where IF he were acquitted or so much evidence is suppressed b/c the threshold in military court for evidence is different than civilian court, he should, technically, walk. Holder seems to suggest he wouldn't walk. Well, if that's the case, then why even have the trial? If he could walk, where is he walking? Holder seems to suggest it wouldn't be in the USA, but that it would be somewhere. Sorry, but "failure is not an option" is not an answer to what do we do if the jury sets him loose? Even a brand new trial attorney knows that strange crap happens when a jury is involved. Have evidence problems and it gets even trickier.
It seems like someone wants to put the past on display, air our secrets and do further damage to our ability to prosecute this war.
NOT happy with this decision. But, what else is new?
Posted by: Guard Wife at November 19, 2009 07:44 PM (I6LTM)
2
Schwing! Thank so much for sharing that...I feel so much smarter now.
Posted by: Kate at November 19, 2009 07:45 PM (J1l7A)
3
Um, my question was, where are they going to find a jury of his peers? And just by having the trial in the US, doesn't that almost automatically give them grounds for appeal, because it would be unfair...not to mention NY, near Ground Zero. Are they now going to decide that Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan is not going to be tried by a military tribunal (because he might claim that he is a military combattant or something)? And so let's say that the White House is going to strong arm the courts in NY to make sure a convinction happens, because failure isn't an option. It almost sounds like they aren't going to afford KSM due process, which nobody really cares about for that particular accused, but it perverts our legal system and creates a precedent for US citizens losing their rights as the accused. There is so much unbelievably wrong about this, that I hope they realize their mistake before it's too late. It is such a farce.
Posted by: Calivalleygirl at November 19, 2009 09:12 PM (irIko)
4
Day by Day showed us today where the jury of peers could be found, I thought that was a good idea, Chicago, of course. I almost came up with some respect for Graham over this, but still he has a LOT make up for.
Posted by: Ruth H at November 19, 2009 11:31 PM (WPw5a)
LIVING THE HIGH LIFE, ON OUR DIME
Mark Steyn would be happy: Uighurs are back in the news! At Powerline:
It's hard to know what to make of this, apart from the fact that the
world is a weird place, and getting weirder all the time. I'm fine with
resettling the Uighurs, but is it really necessary for U.S. taxpayers
to fund "spotless hardwood floors, a fresh coat of paint, new furniture
and appliances, and a sweeping view of the ocean"? Not to mention
housing, job training, food, and all other living expenses, including
air conditioning, cable television and high-speed internet, which is a
"rarity" in Palau. If the administration is looking for volunteers to
live at government expense in an island paradise, count me in.
No doubt these expenses are a drop in the bucket compared to the
trillions that the Obama administration is wasting here at home. But
could it be any clearer that we are living under a government that
treats our tax money--which is to say, our work; our time; our
lives--with contempt?
Posted by: Sarah at
09:07 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 177 words, total size 1 kb.
A triumphant Speaker Nancy Pelosi likened the legislation to the passage of Social Security in 1935 and Medicare 30 years later.
"It provides coverage for 96 percent of Americans. It offers everyone,
regardless of health or income, the peace of mind that comes from
knowing they will have access to affordable health care when they need
it," said Rep. John Dingell
And like those other two things that passed, it will eventually end up costing far more money than ever expected and will be the downfall of the US.
1
Is there a black ribbon we can wear or something? I'm so disgusted with our gov't, and apparently a 'mean, uncaring person' according to at least one person for not thinking this is the best piece of legislation ever passed.
Posted by: Mare at November 08, 2009 08:55 AM (HUa8I)
YES, WE'RE SERIOUS
Nothing burns me up more than politicians' contempt for people who want to adhere to the original constraints of our founding document.
Her sneering at the question makes me so mad I could scream.
A comment at youtube:
It has literally never occurred to any true Liberal Democrat that their policies should be in any way constrained by the U.S. Constitution.
Posted by: Sarah at
12:47 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 64 words, total size 1 kb.
I DON'T GET IT
Personally, I think many people in our country are just plain goofy. When Republicans are in office, they want Democrats. When Democrats are in, they want Republicans. Look at the Rasmussen generic ballot poll. Last year, people couldn't wait to have a Dem. Now they're itchin' for an R. Is politics just a large-scale case of 'the grass is always greener'? What happened to voting on your principles?
I mean, a good number of these people in Virginia had to have voted for Pres Obama and then now voted for the Republican governor. That does not make sense.
I don't get it.
I think Krauthammer makes a good point about the 2008 election:
It tells you that '08
was a charisma election, a one-shot deal, and all this talk about
realignment, about a new era, of the death of Republicanism or
conservatism is utter nonsense.
It was an unusual
election last year. All the stars were aligned Democratic, charismatic
candidate. Still only a seven point victory. The return to the norm is
happening now, and we're going to see it tomorrow night.
I just don't understand voting on charisma, period. Vote your principles.
1
"I just don't understand voting on charisma, period. Vote your principles."
Ah, and therein lies the rub. I daresay the people who were expecting Obama to pay their mortgage & gas up their car as well as those as recently as a few weeks ago who were waiting on their "Obama money" either 1) voted their principles (gimme, gimme, gimme b/c I'm entitled) or 2) don't have principles.
Either way, this will go down in the history books as the example of "elections have consequences." I just hope that we can stop the mess before our kids also have to point to our pre-'08 life in the States and say, "this is how the United States was before it went to hell in a handbasket."
Posted by: Guard Wife at November 04, 2009 08:49 AM (p4/8e)
I think a lot of voter decisions work as follows: If I'm happy with the way things are going, I vote for the incumbent. If I'm not, I vote to throw him out.
Posted by: david foster at November 04, 2009 09:20 AM (uWlpq)
Noor Almaleki, whom I wrote about over the weekend, has died, the latest Western victim of a Muslim honor killing. If there were a Matthew Shepard murder every few months, Frank Rich et al would be going bananas about the "climate of hate" in our society, but you can run over your daughter, decapitate your wife, drown three teenage girls and a polygamous spouse, and progressive opinion and the press couldn't give a hoot. Indeed, as The Atlantic notes, it's merely an obsession of us right-wing kooks.
If you live in the United States, you are FAR more likely to be gay or be close to someone who is gay than you are to be close to someone who would engage in a Muslim Honor Killing (please read that slowly or it will sound like I'm saying something I'm not actually saying - *snort*).
Each "hate crime" death is more personal, because it hits close to home. Thus there is more of an impetus for SOMETHING TO BE DONE!!! And usually THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN is put in there somewhere, generally by Rosie O'Donnell.
Posted by: airforcewife at November 04, 2009 11:55 AM (uE3SA)
BABY SAYINGS SUCK
Sig brought up an excellent point about bibs in the comments:
He has another few that were store bought and have annoying sayings on
them. "Hello world, I have arrived!" Stuff like that. One says "It's
all about me." I hate that one and I always turn it upside down if it's
the only one left and I have to use it.
I totally understand where he's coming from. But I also think he's lucky to have a baby boy, because I've found it's so much worse with girl stuff.
The worst I've seen so far? I mean besides all the run-of-the-mill stuff that says DIVA and PRINCESS on it? The shirt that said "Who needs a piggy bank when you have Daddy?" Second worst: "You're never too young for diamonds." On a 0-3 month old onesie.
I hate hate hate all the baby crap that says that the baby is the boss, that grandma is wrapped around my little finger, that God personally made me as an angel and then broke the mold, etc. I want my kid to have self-confidence, but this is disgusting. No, you are not God's gift to the universe, kid, sorry. Judging from the state of baby clothes sayings, you'd think we're raising a generation of Eric Cartmans.
I try to stay far far away from shirts and bibs with sayings. Well, except for the one AirForceWife gave us that says IRS DEDUCTION. That one's funny.
1
Just wait, Sarah.... The clothes for girls become more ridiculous as they grow older. I have a hard time finding appropriate clothes for my 6 year old. Everything is low cut and WAY too short. Not sure why we think little girls need to dress the way even adults shouldn't.
Posted by: Keri at October 23, 2009 08:19 AM (dtvJC)
2
It is amazingly difficult to not spend an arm and a leg and still dress your daughter appropriately. And, by appropriately, I mean age-appropriate in the non-2009 "find your inner hoochie" sense.
Talbot's kids was great, but they are defunct now. Land's End, some Old Navy and Osh Kosh are usually helpful.
I also detest sayings on children's rears and the like. Ick.
Posted by: Guard Wife at October 23, 2009 09:36 AM (p4/8e)
I have a friend(?) who just had the most adorable baby girl. While visiting to see the baby for the first time, she showed me all of the baby stuff and every damned piece of clothing had something written on it. Of course I did the obligitory "smile" and "cute", until she showed me a onesie with the saying " I LOVE MY DADDY" and underneath it said "even though he is an asshole".
Well, I guess she saw the horror on my face and said "What? What?". So, I expressed to her how unappropriate I thought that was, and she laughed and said "...yeah, he (the daddy) hates it too, so I'm going to make sure she wears it alot."
I don't think I will be visiting her and that adorable baby in the future. What a shame.
Posted by: jw at October 23, 2009 10:24 AM (spEu4)
4
Taste. What happened to it? Everything has been dumbed down, lowest common denominator for humor even on baby clothes. We are in ancient Rome, anything goes. Sorry to be so cynical, Sarah, you and those like you are the only hope for our future.
Posted by: Ruth H at October 23, 2009 11:36 AM (KLwh4)
5
IF we ever finally have a baby, regardless of gender, I'll find a way to get it an "Evil Dictator In Training" outfit :-)
Posted by: Beth at October 23, 2009 12:40 PM (ZT9NN)
6
Three cheers for you. All of those baby clothes remind me of the bumper stickers I see that say "BITCH." Your kid's the boss? Daddy's just a piggy bank? Your daughter's a diva? That's a character flaw, folks, a problem that needs to be worked on, not something to proudly proclaim and flaunt!
Posted by: Lucy at October 23, 2009 01:07 PM (TEZ1F)
Yeah, messages on kids' clothes are almost NEVER good - even for boys. I want my son to know he's more than "Mommy's little mess-maker."
Never has learning to sew cute little jumpers & stuff sounded SO appealing as now ...
(That Fig Tree place is one heck of a start, btw!!!)
Posted by: Krista at October 23, 2009 02:17 PM (sUTgZ)
8
I bought Henry a shirt in DC that said Future President, he was in kindergarten, and it was elcction time..
Cor ahas one that says Girls hunt too, and Daddy is my Hero
Posted by: awtm at October 23, 2009 05:39 PM (k54Mw)
9
I worked at a Carter's store for almost a year and a half after graduating with my M.Ed. It was something I could do to help pay the bills and still be able to substitute teach. They (generally) stick with tasteful stuff.
I've seen my niece in a black "Barf Vader" t-shirt, and more recently one that says "My daddy's the big kahuna", and one in a pink camo "PRINCESS". Of course, I don't see her every day. I'd thought about making some baby clothes for her, but she's growing so fast, I wouldn't be able to keep up. She's only 14 months old, but she's already fitting into 3T stuff...
A young lady my sisters and I know from the ballpark (she's still in elementary school, and she's going to be my sister's flower girl in 2 weeks) likes to shop "Justice for Girls". Yeah, that's one of the places that sells stuff with writing across the butt. Her parents are divorced and she lives with mom, but it's dad that takes her out to the ballgames. I have had to stop myself from saying anything to dad, since he's not the one taking his daughter shopping for clothes...
Posted by: Miss Ladybug at October 23, 2009 06:44 PM (paOhf)
10
My dad has been into MMA before it was really called that...they used to call it street fighting, real world combatives, etc...
At any rate, when he had my little brother a few years back MMA had started to become mainstream and a lot of the clothes they bought for him reflected my dad's interest and skill...
1) My dad can choke your dad out 2) Snap, Tap or Nap...actually, just the nap 3) It's not a crib...I'm training for cage fighting 4) Future Champion of the World
Some of those are only funny or cute for MMA fans. I added in a few "geeky" math joke ones to cover my side of the deal but I was just glad there wasn't any of the sailor outfit or Easter outfits...my little bro should grow up tough and smart...
Posted by: Matt at October 23, 2009 09:29 PM (40Xoi)
11
I agree with you wholeheartedly on the inappropriate clothing for little girls. My youngest is twelve now and everything in every store is designed to start these girls on the road to recreational sex at the earliest age possible. We never buy anything with writing on the rear end even when she was a baby and now we're just trying to keep her boobs, bellybutton and nether regions covered. When you do find something even close to suitable, it's so tight it looks painted on. Aaaarrrggghh.
Now my daughter is having the same problem with my 1 year old granddaughter. Difficult to find just plain clothes.
And even though she has Mimi wrapped around her teeny, tiny perfect little finger, I will never let it be put on her clothing. It's our little secret.
Posted by: Pamela at October 24, 2009 01:11 AM (zJK/n)
12
I'm not universally opposed to all writing. In fact, I can't wait to buy this shirt. But most of the writing is crap, or offensive, or slutty. Who designs that?
I could always get the shirt I saw that said MY MAMA LOVES OBAMA...
Posted by: Sarah at October 24, 2009 07:19 AM (gWUle)
13
I tend to buy my daughter's clothes in the boys' section anyhow. One, they tend to have fewer sayings on them. Two, she actually likes rockets and dinosaurs. Three, I didn't have to worry about low-cut, short-short shorts ON MY INFANT.
Seriously. Go to Target, and pick up a pair of boys' Circo shorts and a pair of girls' Circo shorts, in the same size. Notice the difference in cut. Crap, half the time the girls' shorts wouldn't have covered her diaper!
Posted by: Tara at October 24, 2009 10:59 AM (2fGuG)
14
I do love the geeky humor, and some of the "little boy" humor. I have a few shirts I found at Walgreens that were pretty funny:
"Diaper Loading, 75%" (With progress bar)
"With a Shirt this Cool, Who Needs Pants?"
"Hey dude, your girlfriend keeps checking me out."
We also have a onesie from our friends that says, "Shh . . . I'm downloading" and another I got at his shower that has a little muffin with muscle arms that says "Stud Muffin". SO cute!
I wanted to get him a Baby Trogdor onesie, but they were sold out at the time. Might have to check availability again.
http://www.homestarrunnerstore.com/babytrogdor.html
I do agree, though, that most of the shirts with words are kind of silly, especially for girls. And I HATE the words-across-the-butt trend. That's just wrong for any age.
Posted by: Deltasierra at October 26, 2009 03:19 PM (D4fxj)
15
I have a few onesies that say things like, "handsome" and "cutie pie", or "little monkey", but typically really small under a picture of a monkey holding a banana or something. Not bad. And I have one that says "Daddy Loves Me" that I bought specifically for r&r. But yeah, I went to buy something for my friend's baby girl, and yes, the boy stuff is way better. The "daddy loves me" kind of outfits were the only wearable (imo) sayings, the rest just best to avoid words altogether.
Posted by: leofwende at October 27, 2009 02:23 PM (28CBm)
MASSIVE FRAUD IS A SURPRISE?
On a superficial note, I just have to say how funny I think it is that the Obama administration is all in a tizzy about fraud in the elections in Afghanistan. Our own country is over 200 years old, and we still have people squawking every election cycle about fraud (and rightfully so, because we still have people voting unjustly in every cycle). I just think it's funny to expect Afghanistan to be this bastion of trustworthiness and ethical behavior and to be surprised when it's not. Really, they can't talk about committing more troops until election fraud is settled? I can't believe massive election fraud wasn't factored into the plan as a given!
And a funny (in a sad way) quote from Michael Yon:
Regarding the Afghan election, which is now headed for a runoff,
the good news is that the vast majority of Afghans didn’t vote in the
first place and probably are not paying much attention, since they are
illiterate and mostly live in remote villages, many of which do not
have radios. (That’s also a mouthful of bad news.)
1
I've been trying and trying to think of a good comment for this, but in the end I keep coming back to my reaction when I read your post title - a nodding head and the word "Seriously".
Posted by: airforcewife at October 21, 2009 07:59 AM (9sMSe)
Whoopi Goldberg is facing a fierce backlash after saying that film
director Roman Polanski didn't commit "rape-rape" when he had unlawful
sex with a 13-year-old girl. Goldberg, star of The Color Purple and Sister Act, said: "I know it
wasn't rape-rape. I think it was something else, but I don't believe it was
rape-rape."
His victim, Samantha Gailey, told a grand jury that the director had plied her
with champagne and drugs and taken nude pictures of her in a hot tub during
a fashion shoot. Polanski then had sexual intercourse with her despite her
resistance and requests to be taken home, she said.
Whew. I'm glad I now understand the difference between rape and rape-rape.
So which one did Cameron Diaz mean that Bush would legalize? Real rape or the "I'm famous so I can do whatever I want" rape?
If his unspeakable deed doesn’t meet the standard, what exactly would
Roman Polanski have to do in order to become a pariah in this town … I
mean, besides vote for Sarah Palin?
1
Hollywood's attitude on this just floors me. A 13-year-old CANNOT legally consent to sexual relations, regardless of being pumped full of drugs and alcohol. The list of Hollywood characters saying we should just forget about it, "it was 30 years ago", disgusts me. It's no real wonder why I haven't been to a movie since Marley & Me last holiday season (though I wanted to see Harry Potter, but with baseball season and not having anyone to go with, I missed it). I don't want to give these people my hard-earned money.
Posted by: Miss Ladybug at September 30, 2009 09:52 PM (paOhf)
2
The expressions I get when these people talk probably make me look like Jim Carrey on crack (which is probably normal Jim Carrey, really).
Anyway, I get you. I don't care HOW long ago it was, or how many "good" movies the guy made since then. Your culpability for a crime does not suddenly disappear just because it "happened a long time ago."
Honestly - I think that makes it worse. He's had 30 years to go sow more wild oats. He's had time he should not have had. He's not only NOT learned a lesson in appropriate behavior, but he's had the idea that he's above the law ingrained in him.
He's a pervert, a disgusting pedophile, and a RAPIST and he should be treated as such. I also agree with one of my peeps on Facebook who said that anyone who thinks he should be forgiven should ask themselves if they'd send their daughter or granddaughter over to Uncle Roman's house for a weekend of babysitting.
Right. That's what I thought.
Posted by: airforcewife at October 01, 2009 12:59 AM (9sMSe)
Posted by: Oda Mae at October 01, 2009 06:16 AM (AxelT)
4
Rape is Rape is Rape.. The girl was underage. She could NOT give consent. The charge is RAPE. In my humble opinion, the perpertraor should be hung, drawn and quartered.
Posted by: bx19 at October 01, 2009 05:14 PM (bWGnc)
5
Un. freaking. beleivable. Steam is coming out my ears.
Posted by: Lucy at October 01, 2009 05:38 PM (YNvUz)
6
Also, I wonder how Whoopi would take it if I said that Dog the Bounty Hunter's N word tirade wasn't "racism-racism".
Not that I WOULD say that, because let's face it - it was racism. Seriously.
Just like what Polanski did was rape.
Posted by: airforcewife at October 01, 2009 08:36 PM (9sMSe)
7
It totally disgusted me when I read about that. It's amazing how hurt and unfair Hollywood thinks this "situation" is to them. They need to get over it. Jackazzes. I'm for the drawing and quartering.
Posted by: Susan at October 01, 2009 09:13 PM (EU2Wl)
8
Would it have been "rape-rape" had it happened to Whoopi's daughter or one of her two granddaughters? You bet your butt it would. In an instant.
Better yet, would Whoopi or any other of those that are so quick to rush to Mr. Polanski's defense allow him to EVER babysit their 13 year odl daughter? I doubt it seriously.
Posted by: HomefrontSix at October 05, 2009 07:31 PM (/CWwF)
NO BANG FOR THE BUCK
I reiterate that I think Bjorn Lomborg's argument that crises need to be prioritized is one of the best arguments against stopping global warming. You can grant the premise just for argument's sake but still insist that we shouldn't spend a dollar to get a nickel's worth of good.
Imagine for a moment that the fantasists win the day and that at the
climate conference in Copenhagen in December every nation commits to
reductions even larger than Japan's, designed to keep temperature
increases under 2 degrees Celsius. The result will be a global price
tag of $40 trillion in 2100, to avoid expected climate damage costing
just $1.1 trillion, according to climate economist Richard Tol, a
contributor to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change whose cost
findings were commissioned by the Copenhagen Consensus Center and are
to be published by Cambridge University Press next year.
Unfortunately, no government program has ever been held to the bang-for-your-buck test.
But surely this has to be persuasive, right? How could it not be? I find it persuasive in every instance. Take health care: I don't care if they can promise that everyone will have total coverage and no one will ever be sick again. Our nation simply doesn't have the money now to cover 30 million new people. Even if it were a government program I could get behind like...um...hmm...giving every law-abiding household a handgun and lessons on how to use it, we just are too far in debt to be adding new programs to the list, no matter what they are.
And certainly we have too much debt to spend $40 to get a dollar of benefit.
CONSTITUTION DAY FAIL
My government class in high school was a joke. We just memorized and regurgitated how many representatives there are and how old they have to be to run, and then we watched Mr. Smith Goes to Washington and hoped that somehow we would all learn how this marvelous American experiment works. FAIL. Completely.
I was just reading an article about how a Muslim girl is suing Abercrombie and Fitch because they discriminated against her for wearing a headscarf. In the comments section, a different Muslim girl is arguing that everyone has the Constitutional right to work wherever they want. She said a size 20 woman has the right to be a runway model. Quote: "That's the right of an American citizen per our grand Constitution."
Does anyone even read the Constitution anymore? Apparently everyone's high school government class was as bad as mine.
1
Well, I think everyone should have the right to be an airline pilot, especially those who are too dumb to pass either the practical or written test. And I think those who share the attitudes in the thread you mention should be restricted to flying with such pilots.
Posted by: david foster at September 19, 2009 08:17 AM (uWlpq)
2
Same for brain surgeons. One for those of us who require education and certification, another for those who think everyone has a right to be whatever they want to be.
Posted by: chuck at September 19, 2009 01:49 PM (bMH2g)
3
I do believe that I would be an astronaut. No,I have no background or training,thanks. Don't need it apparently.
My Civics class was taught by a Mr McKinney. Who was the varsity boys basketball coach. In Indiana,it is a big deal.
Mr McKinney would give us a worksheet on Monday and that same worksheet was the test on Friday. We had the class time to find the information to answer the quiz cum test questions.
It was a joke. I was angry that McKinney spent the whole time diagramming plays on the blackboard.
Some of us did our own version of the class in the back of the room because (IMAGINE!) we were interested.
We formed our own kitchen cabinet and studied the depts in it. Got into some interesting debates as well.
We were told to pipe down. Ruining his concentration,don't you know.
McKinney did go on to another school after aa few years and won the state championship. So glad that he reached his goals in life. Snort.
Posted by: MaryIndiana at September 20, 2009 01:47 AM (09ovY)
4
Heck, I'd be happy if our elected representatives had the barest inkling of what is in the Constitution and what this country was founded on.
Sigh.
Posted by: MargeinMI at September 20, 2009 08:02 AM (gXnOq)
"I have a right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, but there is no guarantee of equal results"
One of Glenn Beck's 9 principles of his 9/12 project.
Posted by: tim at September 21, 2009 11:22 AM (nno0f)
6
You got to watch "Mr. Smith goes to Washington?" I didn't get to watch that...in fact, I don't remember who my Gov teacher was...who was yours? Everything I ever needed to know about Gov I learned from Mr. DeFabbio via history classes...but hey, you got to watch a movie ;-)
Posted by: Matt at September 21, 2009 08:29 PM (wNBv7)
7
Matt -- We also got to watch 12 Angry Men to learn about the judicial system. Sigh. I had Mr. Moore, who was a new teacher, straight out of college. He was kind of a douchebag.
Posted by: Sarah at September 22, 2009 07:17 AM (2Hw+P)
EFFECTIVE OUTCOMES
I am feeling less unsettled lately...
After the huge march on Washington last weekend, and the defunding of ACORN this week, I am feeling more like We the People can pressure the government to represent us.
Here are a few things that regular old Americans have achieved since I wrote that I was unsettled:
For an explanation of the list, in case you're not familiar with all of them, listen here.
I am feeling more optimistic.
Posted by: Sarah at
10:37 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 78 words, total size 1 kb.
HELP, HELP, I'M BEING OPPRESSED!
I was racially discriminated against today.
I got in a black cashier's line at Walmart. She took the lady in front of me and then switched off her light, saying that I'd have to change lines because she needed to close down for a few minutes. So I hopped over to the line next to hers, behind three other people. The black cashier finished up with the lady she was helping, puttered around for about 30 seconds, found out that she was no longer needed to help clean up another register, and then turned her light back on and motioned for a black lady who was just walking up to the checkout area to get in her line.
Raaaaacist! She helped a black customer instead of telling me to go ahead and get back in her line! She took a black lady who'd just arrived to checkout instead of white me, who'd been waiting for several minutes! I need a Beer Summit!
94 percent of African-American eighth graders reported to Harris-Britt
that they'd felt discriminated against in the prior three months.
Now, I don't really think it was racial discrimination at Walmart. I think the cashier was kinda boorish and lazy, and that she didn't care who she helped next as long as she was doing her job. When I called her on it, she apologized as if the thought had never crossed her mind to ask me to return to her line. She didn't do it because I was white; she did it because she was unobservant and clueless.
But it got me thinking and I remembered the above statistic from a recent Newsweek article about children's racial attitudes. If almost every single black pre-teen says they're constantly being discriminated against, then it seems to me that, if the tables were turned and a white cashier helped a white customer over a black one, some people out there are interpreting that as racism.
I don't think it's racism. I think it's laziness, or bad manners, or tunnel vision you get from doing the same mundane task all day long. But I don't for one second think she pushed me out of her line because I was white. But do black people think that? It seems some of these pre-teens probably do. How else could they all say they've been discriminated against recently? A few may have truly met with bigotry, but a good number of them must just be interpreting the slightest offenses as racism.
It just got me thinking that, if you try to find slights based on skin color, you will see them. But I'd bet that much of the "discrimination" people feel they're encountering is just a misunderstanding or a breakdown in acceptable social behavior, not racism.
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.
You can pretty easily substitute laziness for stupidity, I'd say.
Another favorite saying of mine is that when you're holding a hammer all of your problems look like nails. So, if you've been told all of your life that you're a victim, you start looking for proof.
Posted by: Christa at September 15, 2009 01:06 PM (2qSbp)
Reading this post embodied your last point. I wanted to look for a nail after the first sentence. Then I got to the incident, initially thought that it was a nail - that it was racist - and then instantly realized, hey, wait, this could have happened for nonracial reasons.
Most of the cashiers at stores near me are black. I'm not black, and I probably had the same thing happen to me, but I never thought anything of it. I didn't take out my Victimâ„¢ hammer because I wasn't thinking of nails. I'm not white either. But when my interactions with whites go wrong, I almost never see any nails. I can only think of two or three incidents in my entire life that might have been racist. Might.
Those kids need desensitivity training. They need to be told that not everything is a nail. Don't take out that hammer unless you're certain you need it. Otherwise you look paranoid and no one but your fellow 'victims' will take you seriously anymore.
Posted by: Amritas at September 15, 2009 02:17 PM (+nV09)
3
As a half black woman speaking, I have experienced this crap from more and more people on a general basis. People are lazy and stupid. Growing up I was not taught that is was alright to cry wolf every time I did not win, get my way, or just wanted something. I had to earn certain things on merit and forgive others because people may just not know, or see. Is that an excuse? No it is not but it is life all around us everyday. If someone goes looking for a frog in the desert then they will find one.
Posted by: Reasa at September 15, 2009 02:47 PM (uKniq)
4
Sarah, you can't be discriminated against. You are white.
Racism is a black thing, you can't possibly understand.
Kill Whitey!
Posted by: chuck at September 16, 2009 12:05 AM (bMH2g)
I work as a trainer at Petsmart. Sometimes when we are really busy they make me cashier because I'm not 18 and have a brain. When we open up a new register we take the next person in line. It does not matter what color they are.
I will however cop to the fact that if a customer comes into my store and they are wearing an abaya and I cannot see their face. I will not wait on them unless I am cashiering and then I have to. 99.9% of the women who comes in wearing them, I'd say there are about a half dozen maybe more per day where I work, are black. It has nothing to do with them being another color. It has everything to do with the fact that I find it absolutely offensive that after all the work that has been done by women's rights activitists that an American woman would chose to subjugate herself in this way.
Plus I just find it straight up offensive that American's choose to dress this way while we are war. I guess I'm a bigot. But I don't really care. My favorite was the 16 year old who came in wearing a hajib scarf, the TIGHTEST pair of jean's I have ever seen, and a half shirt with most of her cleavage hanging out.
Time for me to break out my Infidel t-shirt and my Dad's old hat from when he was stationed at Guantanamo Naval Air Station. I'll let you know if I get fired.
Posted by: Mare at September 16, 2009 08:51 AM (HUa8I)
I am reminded of Nelson Ascher's post again today.
The problem is that I do not want to waste a milligram 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."
1
I don't think this is a time for you to be angry. Your focus is in the right place: your pregnancy. And you have not forgotten 9/11. Otherwise you wouldn't have posted this.
Your focus will be on your daughter for many years to come. This doesn't necessarily mean you've shut off Nelson's laser beam. On the contrary, you're training a member of the next generation of laser riflemen. Even if your daughter never becomes a gun enthusiast, she must be armed with the greatest weapons of the West: its ideas.
She must be loyal to the ideas that our government has betrayed (emphasis mine):
The State Department’s new “democratic†constitutions
for Afghanistan and Iraq are a disgrace: establishing Islam as the
state religion and elevating sharia as fundamental law. That is not
exporting our values; it is appeasing Islamism. It is putting on
display our lack of will to fight for our principles, which only
emboldens our enemies.
Can you imagine if the Axis got new constitutions like the Afghan and Iraqi constitutions after World War II? What happened to the America that won that war?
Recall, for example, the spectacle of the
Christian prosecuted for apostasy a couple of years back by the
post-Taliban, U.S.-backed Afghan government. He had to be whisked out
of the country because it’s not safe for an ex-Muslim religious convert
in the new Afghanistan. It’s not safe for non-Muslims, period.
Several years ago, she converted from Islam to Christianity ... After her father threatened to kill her for apostasy, a
crime under Islamic Sharia law, Rifqa hitchhiked to the bus station and
fled to Florida [from Ohio].
The 9/11 attacks were extensively planned, over long
periods of time, in, among other places, Berlin, Madrid, San Diego,
Florida, Oklahoma, and Connecticut. Clearly, thriving democracy in
those places provided no security.
A country that sacrifices for its enemies (emphasis mine):
And what we had our hands full with in Iraq and Afghanistan was
nation-building. Quite apart from the inherent futility of trying to
democratize fundamentalist Muslim countries, our efforts in those two
places were doomed if we failed to address Iran’s promotion of
terrorism and its intolerable nuclear threat. What has happened to Iraq
has happened because we lacked the will to deal with Iran. We left
unaccomplished the mission that was vital to our national interests
while laboring exhaustively to create Islamic democracies that are
either hostile or useless to us.
A country that imports sharia, the antithesis of your ideas, into places like Ohio. Ohio!
None of that is primarily the fault of - as Nelson put it - "Chomsky and the BBC, Old Europe and ANSWER, second and third rate
entertainers and academics". I'm not mad at them. I laugh at them. I even laugh at the first-rate entertainers and academics who venture out of their fields to support the latest Leftist fashion. They're just a sideshow, a distraction. Let's focus on our real external and internal enemies.
We can’t stop Muslim countries from being Islamist. That
is their choice. It should be no concern of ours who rules them as long
as they do not threaten American interests. When they inevitably do
threaten us, or allow their territories to be launch pads for
terrorists, we should smash them. But the price of defending our nation
cannot be spending years — at a cost of precious lives and hundreds of
billions of dollars — in a vain attempt to give people who despise us a
way of life they don’t want.
The question for me is, what do we do about the latter, about our enemies within? Can we simply keep voting them out of office? Instead of worrying about freedom for Islamists abroad, we should worry about the future of freedom here. As McCarthy suggested,
The surge we need is at home: to roll back Islamism’s
infiltration of our schools, our financial system, our law, and our
government. In addition to not being universal, the “values of the
human spirit†are not immortal. If we don’t defend them in the West,
they will die.
But there are more threats than terrorism. Recently we have seen a homegrown surge against socialism in the form of tea parties - of Rightist protests against Dr. gOvernment. Our citizen-troops may win this battle. But can they keep winning? Or will they - we - eventually be outnumbered by those who vote for 'free' handouts? Will we have to retreat to our gulch?
PS: Nelson, wherever you are, I miss you.
Posted by: Amritas at September 11, 2009 10:20 AM (+nV09)
2
I think my anger is spread thin because I'm just so tired. TIRED. Tired of the constant deployments and TDYS, tired of fighting at home and keeping up the face for those deployed to keep their morale up, tired of the constant attacks and name-calling, tired of seeming to take two steps back for every step forward, and tired because it seems like we're still on the brink in so many places.
I'm not ready to give up, I'm just tired. I need a rest, and there doesn't seem to be one in sight. I'm still angry, and I think that's why I refuse to give up, but it's hard to focus that anger when you're overwhelmed.
On the other hand, I've also ever been one to to smack myself about whining when seeing someone else's situation. How can I complain about being tired when I think about what Britain went through in WWII? My children and I don't have to retreat into the metro stations to avoid bombing raids every night. We can eat whatever we want - my grandmother had shortages.
How can I complain about being tired when there were members of my husband's family who went through Stalingrad? My fatigue is NOTHING compared to that.
I'm lucky, and I have no right to slow down. But sometimes I do. And that's why my anger is spread thin. But days like today are what cause me to regroup and regather and remember what we're fighting for.
I'm tired, but I have not forgotten.
Posted by: airforcewife at September 11, 2009 11:37 AM (CDkfD)
Count me in as relieved and thrilled that Van Jones was forced into resignation. He was a big part of the reason I wrote that I was unsettled. The fact that a man like that was anywhere near the White House is chilling.
In light of all we now know, this gauzy January 12 profile of Jones in The New Yorker is well worth a read. What do you see? I see the too-rapid rise of an inexperienced and poorly vetted man (poorly vetted by the entire liberal establishment, not just the White House) adept at getting and wasting vast sums of money for virtually non-existent plans, all based on seductive political rhetoric rather than substance.
I just watched David Axelrod, the top ranking political advisor in the White House, and Robert Gibbs, the President's spokesman on "Meet the Press" and "This Week" respectively. Neither of them was willing, even after repeated questioning, to offer a single negative word about Van Jones. Not one word. A 9/11 Truther and defender of Mumia-Abu Jamal is not radical enough for this White House to distance itself from the man in any way. Again and again, this White House has been offered chances to condemn the man's views and they have willfully and quite deliberately refused.
The point, of course, is that Obama vetted Jones just fine. President Obama is not Mr. Magoo — haplessly gravitating to Truther Van and Ayers and Dohrn and Klonsky and Davis and Wright and the Chicago New Party and ACORN, etc. Jones is a kindred spirit. Obama knows exactly who he is. Jones was given a non-confirmation job precisely because that circumvented the vetting process. This isn't one of those things that just happen. This is Barack "Transparency" Obama gaming the system.
When Van Jones talks of the aims of the civil rights movement and its initial minimalist agenda, he references the ultimate desire of 'redistributing all wealth.' When one collates that revelation with Obama's own off-handed "spread the wealth" comment, his 'fair share' sermons, and his 2001 public radio interview thoughts on “the issues of redistribution of wealth,and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society,†we begin to see a pattern in which one’s income and wealth do not properly belong to the earner, but are seen as illegitimate and thus legitimately can be redistributed to others.
I am glad that man is gone. But the fact he was ever there in the first place still alarms me.
I agree - it's great that one radical Communist revolutionary is gone, but at the same time, I don't believe FOR A MINUTE that he *wasn't* "vetted" (such as the process is... ethics waivers and all...). I mean, seriously, that'd be a rather incompetent bunch of security around POTUS.
What I'm afraid of is that POTUS is now trying to cover his tracks by dropping ballast. I hope he doesn't manage to do that.
Posted by: Krista at September 07, 2009 09:30 AM (sUTgZ)
2
What is extremely disturbing is the failure of many if not most news organizations to report *anything* about the Van Jones controversy *until he resigned*. Which makes it clear that they are putting their obligations to their viewers/readers...and also (in the case of public corporations and subsidiaries thereof) to their shareholders BEHIND the promotion of the personal political opinions of their employees/executives.
Posted by: david foster at September 07, 2009 05:01 PM (uWlpq)
3
What should also be troubling is that this is only one of many. You can bet there are more people in this administration with exactly the same views, just not ones that are as easily demonstrably radical.
Posted by: John at September 07, 2009 10:16 PM (crTpS)
4
I don't trust this administration one iota. I don't think there is ANYTHING they can do to change that position...
Posted by: Miss Ladybug at September 07, 2009 10:40 PM (paOhf)
5they are putting their obligations to their viewers/readers...and also
(in the case of public corporations and subsidiaries thereof) to their
shareholders BEHIND the promotion of the personal political opinions of
their employees/executives.
david, you assume that "obligations" and "personal political opinions" are mutually exclusive. On the contrary, it is in the public's best interest to shield them from the truth about herOes like Van Jones (Barack bless him) until they are ready. It is still too early to expect the victims of the Bush regime to accept someone who knows the truth about 9/11.
Andy McCarthy (ugh, that name - 50s flashbacks!) and Krista are right. President Obama is not Mr. Magoo. Only Europpressors are blind. Great Leaders can recognize herOism when they see it. Van Jones was vetted. He passed with flying red colors.
John is also right. The forces of eeeevil may have struck down one herO of the peOple, but other nObles are still on their thrones to serve the greater gOOd.
We Great Leaders must be careful. You guys are starting to look under the red curtain. Why can't you close your eyes and dream of unicOrns?
Posted by: kevin at September 08, 2009 12:31 AM (h9KHg)
6
Kevin, that last paragraph is just... PRICELESS. ;-)
Posted by: Krista at September 08, 2009 10:23 AM (sUTgZ)
This is why people are fed up these days. Our politicians are dimwits who cuss at and belittle their constituents when asked simple questions of fact.
People are straight-up tired of pompous politicians, jerks who think they're better than us because they appropriate our money to fly around on fancy jets.
1
This video was infuriating. I didn't find the interviewer's questions offensive in any way. They were the same type of questions I would have asked. The arrogance Stark displayed was hard to fathom. I hope this goes viral and costs him his seat. He deserves it.
Posted by: Amy at September 03, 2009 11:09 AM (9fDOS)
2
Oh for the love of all that is holy... INFURIATING.
What a pompous douche. And he's ALWAYS been a pompous douche, too (I lived in his district at one time).
Oh, and his degree isn't in economics, either. So perhaps instead of attacking someone else's ability to question, he should find someone who fits his apparent definition of who is allowed to explain.
And finally - Stark actually called a military member who had written him a letter critical of his vote on Iraq and left this message for him:
Dan, this is Congressman Pete Stark, and I just got your fax. And you
don't know what you're talking about. So if you care about enlisted
people, you wouldn't have voted for that thing either. But probably
somebody put you up to this, and I'm not sure who it was, but I doubt
if you could spell half the words in the letter, and somebody wrote it
for you. So I don't pay much attention to it. But I'll call you back
later and let you tell me more about why you think you're such a great
goddamn hero and why you think that this generals [sic] and the Defense
Department, who forced these poor enlisted guys to do what they did,
shouldn't be held to account. That's the issue. So if you want to stick
it to a bunch of enlisted guys, have your way. But if you want to get
to the bottom of people who forced this awful program in Iraq, then you
should understand more about it than you obviously do. Thanks
And yet he continually gets re-elected. By enormous margins.
Posted by: airforcewife at September 03, 2009 11:37 AM (CDkfD)
3
Holy moly, I can not believe that message he left...wowzers...
Posted by: CaliValleyGirl at September 03, 2009 12:51 PM (irIko)
4People are straight-up tired of pompous politicians
"People"? You mean the millions who elected Obama and who will vote for us socialists forever? The masses who will never regret keeping St. Ted (Barack bless him) in office for decades?
jerks who think they're better than us
We are better. We have power. We love it, and aren't afraid to (ab)use it. Might makes right! (With a small r, of course.)
People love the powerful. They want dynasties - Kennedys and Obamas.
"5 point pledge"? How about a five-year plan?
The more we borrow, the richer we are...seriously?
Seriously. The richer he is. The richer we the elites are! We cannot create, only legislate ... confiscate. Take. "Borrow" is just a prettier way of putting it.
We can do anything and you cannot stop us. When Omerica collapses, we will just flee to some Eurabian resort.
And yet he continually gets re-elected. By enormous margins.
Just like other Great Leaders. If it weren't for Republican wreckers, results would look more like these from the DPRK:
The election committee also stated that 99.98% of all registered voters took part in voting, with 100% voting for their candidate in each district. All seats were won by the Democratic Front for the Reunification of the Fatherland, under the control of the Worker's Party.
Soon you will all vOte the prOper way.
Posted by: kevin at September 03, 2009 01:02 PM (+nV09)
Posted by: Pamela at September 03, 2009 01:26 PM (H2JBc)
6
This totally reminded me of the commercial where the guy brags about all the stuff he's got, all the spending he's doing and how wealthy a life he is living. Then he asks, "How do I do it? Oh, I'm in debt up to my eyeballs" Classic. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn5EP9StlVA
Posted by: bdol78 at September 03, 2009 01:32 PM (W3XUk)
7
There aren't really words to express my opinion of this man's arrogance...
Posted by: Miss Ladybug at September 03, 2009 09:42 PM (paOhf)
8
I don't need a degree in proctology to determine that Pete Stark is an A-hole.
Posted by: Susan at September 03, 2009 11:38 PM (Y8ZGj)
He must by why California is collapsing under the weight of its debt so very very prosperous and wealthy!
Posted by: Deltasierra at September 04, 2009 04:48 PM (ccqq6)
10
Not just California, Deltasierra, but all of Omerica (emphasis ours)!
America's public debt is already 55% of GDP, twice
its share in the '80s, and the US budget deficit is expected to hit
$1.6 trillion this year and a further $9 trillion by 2019. If what we
are witnessing is not somehow reversed, the dollar will collapse
exactly the way of the Russian ruble, the Thai baht and the Malaysian
ringgit did last decade, in response to their governments' fiscal
derelictions. The only difference will be that a traumatized dollar
will take with it America's geopolitical sway.
Who needs that? We'll be rich!
Posted by: kevin at September 08, 2009 12:36 AM (h9KHg)
11
So rich that we won't have to worry about rising unemployment. Enjoy your coming funemployment! Sure, Pete Stark isn't too smOOth, but trust him. He graduated from MIT (Chomsky Central!) and Berkeley. He is smart. He is a Great Leader. Follow him to utOpia! If you were him and saw guys like Jan whathisname being skeptical about the prOgram for prOsperity, you'd get angry too.
Posted by: kevin at September 08, 2009 12:27 PM (+nV09)
153kb generated in CPU 0.0803, elapsed 0.17 seconds.
62 queries taking 0.1436 seconds, 289 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Search Thingy
There is neither happiness nor misery in the world; there is only the comparison of one state with another, nothing more. He who has felt the deepest grief is best able to experience supreme happiness. We must have felt what it is to die, Morrel, that we may appreciate the enjoyments of living. --The Count of Monte Cristo--
While our troops go out to defend our country, it is incumbent upon us to make the country worth defending. --Deskmerc--
Contrary to what you've just seen, war is neither glamorous nor fun. There are no winners, only losers. There are no good wars, with the following exceptions: The American Revolution, WWII, and the Star Wars Trilogy. --Bart Simpson--
If you want to be a peacemaker, you've gotta learn to kick ass. --Sheriff of East Houston, Superman II--
Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without an accordion. You just leave a lot of useless noisy baggage behind. --Jed Babbin--
Dante once said that the hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in a period of moral crisis maintain their neutrality. --President John F. Kennedy--
War is a bloody, killing business. You've got to spill their blood, or they will spill yours. --General Patton--
We've gotta keep our heads until this peace craze blows over. --Full Metal Jacket--
Those who threaten us and kill innocents around the world do not need to be treated more sensitively. They need to be destroyed. --Dick Cheney--
The Flag has to come first if freedom is to survive. --Col Steven Arrington--
The purpose of diplomacy isn't to make us feel good about Eurocentric diplomatic skills, and having countries from the axis of chocolate tie our shoelaces together does nothing to advance our infantry. --Sir George--
I just don't care about the criticism I receive every day, because I know the cause I defend is right. --Oriol--
It's days like this when we're reminded that freedom isn't free. --Chaplain Jacob--
Bumper stickers aren't going to accomplish some of the missions this country is going to face. --David Smith--
The success of multilateralism is measured not merely by following a process, but by achieving results. --President Bush--
Live and act within the limit of your knowledge and keep expanding it to the limit of your life.
--John Galt--
First, go buy a six pack and swig it all down. Then, watch Ace Ventura. And after that, buy a Hard Rock Cafe shirt and come talk to me. You really need to lighten up, man.
--Sminklemeyer--
You've got to kill people, and when you've killed enough they stop fighting --General Curtis Lemay--
If we wish to be free, if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending, if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained -- we must fight! --Patrick Henry--
America has never been united by blood or birth or soil. We are bound by ideals that move us beyond our backgrounds, lift us above our interests and teach us what it means to be citizens. Every child must be taught these principles. Every citizen must uphold them. And every immigrant, by embracing these ideals, makes our country more, not less, American. --President George W. Bush--
are usually just cheerleading sessions, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing but a soothing reduction in blood pressure brought about by the narcotic high of being agreed with. --Bill Whittle
War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
--John Stuart Mill--
We are determined that before the sun sets on this terrible struggle, our flag will be recognized throughout the world as a symbol of freedom on the one hand and of overwhelming force on the other. --General George Marshall--
We can continue to try and clean up the gutters all over the world and spend all of our resources looking at just the dirty spots and trying to make them clean. Or we can lift our eyes up and look into the skies and move forward in an evolutionary way.
--Buzz Aldrin--
America is the greatest, freest and most decent society in existence. It is an oasis of goodness in a desert of cynicism and barbarism. This country, once an experiment unique in the world, is now the last best hope for the world.
--Dinesh D'Souza--
Recent anti-Israel protests remind us again of our era's peculiar alliance: the most violent, intolerant, militantly religious movement in modern times has the peace movement on its side. --James Lileks--
As a wise man once said: we will pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
Unless the price is too high, the burden too great, the hardship too hard, the friend acts disproportionately, and the foe fights back. In which case, we need a timetable.
--James Lileks--
I am not willing to kill a man so that he will agree with my faith, but I am prepared to kill a man so that he cannot force my compatriots to submit to his.
--Froggy--
You can say what you want about President Bush; but the truth is that he can take a punch. The man has taken a swift kick in the crotch for breakfast every day for 6 years and he keeps getting up with a smile in his heart and a sense of swift determination to see the job through to the best of his abilties.
--Varifrank--
In a perfect world, We'd live in peace and love and harmony with each oither and the world, but then, in a perfect world, Yoko would have taken the bullet.
--SarahBellum--
Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free. --Ronald Reagan--
America is rather like life. You can usually find in it what you look for. It will probably be interesting, and it is sure to be large. --E.M. Forster--
Do not fear the enemy, for your enemy can only take your life. It is far better that you fear the media, for they will steal your HONOR. That awful power, the public opinion of a nation, is created in America by a horde of ignorant, self-complacent simpletons who failed at ditching and shoemaking and fetched up in journalism on their way to the poorhouse. --Mark Twain--
The Enlightenment was followed by the French Revolution and the Napoleonic wars, which touched every European state, sparked vicious guerrilla conflicts across the Continent and killed millions. Then, things really turned ugly after the invention of soccer. --Iowahawk--
Every time I meet an Iraqi Army Soldier or Policeman that I haven't met before, I shake his hand and thank him for his service. Many times I am thanked for being here and helping his country. I always tell them that free people help each other and that those that truly value freedom help those seeking it no matter the cost. --Jack Army--
Right, left - the terms are useless nowadays anyway. There are statists, and there are individualists. There are pessimists, and optimists. There are people who look backwards and trust in the West, and those who look forward and trust in The World. Those are the continuums that seem to matter the most right now. --Lileks--
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.
--Winston Churchill--
A man or a nation is not placed upon this earth to do merely what is pleasant and what is profitable. It is often called upon to carry out what is both unpleasant and unprofitable, but if it is obviously right it is mere shirking not to undertake it. --Arthur Conan Doyle--
A man who has nothing which he cares about more than he does about his personal safety is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the existing of better men than himself. --John Stuart Mill--
After the attacks on September 11, 2001, most of the sheep, that is, most citizens in America said, "Thank God I wasn't on one of those planes." The sheepdogs, the warriors, said, "Dear God, I wish I could have been on one of those planes. Maybe I could have made a difference." --Dave Grossman--
At heart I’m a cowboy; my attitude is if they’re not going to stand up and fight for what they believe in then they can go pound sand. --Bill Whittle--
A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship. --Alexander Tyler--
By that time a village half-wit could see what generations of professors had pretended not to notice. --Atlas Shrugged--
I kept asking Clarence why our world seemed to be collapsing and everything seemed so shitty. And he'd say, "That's the way it goes, but don't forget, it goes the other way too." --Alabama Worley--
So Bush is history, and we have a new president who promises to heal the planet, and yet the jihadists don’t seem to have got the Obama message that there are no enemies, just friends we haven’t yet held talks without preconditions with.
--Mark Steyn--
"I had started alone in this journey called life, people started
gathering up on the way, and the caravan got bigger everyday." --Urdu couplet
The book and the sword are the two things that control the world. We either gonna control them through knowledge and influence their minds, or we gonna bring the sword and take their heads off. --RZA--
It's a daily game of public Frogger, hopping frantically to avoid being crushed under the weight of your own narcissism, banality, and plain old stupidity. --Mary Katharine Ham--
There are more instances of the abridgment of freedoms
of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. --James Madison--
It is in the heat of emotion that good people must remember to stand on principle. --Larry Elder--
Please show this to the president and ask him to remember the wishes of the forgotten man, that is, the one who dared to vote against him. We expect to be tramped on but we do wish the stepping would be a little less hard. --from a letter to Eleanor Roosevelt--
The world economy depends every day on some engineer, farmer, architect, radiator shop owner, truck driver or plumber getting up at 5AM, going to work, toiling hard, and producing real wealth so that an array of bureaucrats, regulators, and redistributors can manage the proper allotment of much of the natural largess produced. --VDH--
Parents are often so busy with the physical rearing of children that they miss the glory of parenthood, just as the grandeur of the trees is lost when raking leaves. --Marcelene Cox--
(That Fig Tree place is one heck of a start, btw!!!)
