January 28, 2009
SWING AND A MISS
A lady here in town kept insisting to me that Bush was going to invade Iran before the end of his presidency. For months, she insisted that the "bombing," as she called it, that she was hearing from on post was the most frequent since the Gulf War, which obviously meant that Bush had something up his sleeve.
I tried to gently contradict her along the way, saying that a surprise attack using infantrymen from here in town would not be something that Bush could hide from all of us. Airstrikes, perhaps, but not a Normandy Beach-style invasion. And that maybe the added noise coming from post was just training for regular old Iraq and Afghanistan missions. She insisted that Bush was cooking something up.
So when I saw her today for the first time since Inauguration Day, can I tell you how badly I wanted to rub this in her face? How I wanted to point out that for months she insisted that she had knowledge of some nefarious plot to invade Iran that plain old did. not. happen. And that maybe next time she oughtn't speak in such bold, declarative statements.
But I didn't, because I am a lady. But dadgum, I got tired of being polite while listening to her conspiracy theories.
Posted by: Sarah at
09:01 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 223 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Actually, I wish you WOULD have! Maybe not in an "in your face" way, but in a "Wow... we really dodged a bullet on that one, didn't we". She'd know without you even saying it.
Of course, I'm no lady.
Posted by: Meadowlark at January 28, 2009 10:13 AM (SXBsQ)
2
Why couldn't you believe your own ears? We bet the bombing was deafening. Conservatives are hilarious. They speak of WMDs that never existed, and then turn around and ignore the bombing in their own backyards. America (dead since cOrOnatiOn day - yay!) was such a violent place. We would have fled to Pyongyang had He not claimed the thrOne.
Unfortunately, Bushaitan still lives, and his agents are everywhere attempting to disrupt the prOgram. They can do anything. Like hide "a surprise attack using infantrymen from here in town." They are the witches and warlocks of our time, casting spells upon the innOcent, piOus wOrshippers of the One. Those who have the rash of the Rush are dangerous and should wear a scarlet "W." We will make Joe McCarthy look like a softie.
Did not happen, you say? Perhaps not on a surface level, but the Bushaitanites can attack
the deep structure of reality. Only we Chomskyans are perceptive enough to be immune to Fox-manufactured consent and see the way things
really are. Only we can feel the scorching heat of global burning. Just as your ancestors believed in mystics who claimed to see invisible spirits, you must believe in us and our fabrications, er,
visions. The invasion of Iran, yes, Ira
n, happened.
The New Deal succeeded. Roosevelt is the number one president BO - before Obama.
Only the insane believe their senses. The rest put their faith in our arbitrary authority. When will you wake up and pretend to smell the imaginary coffee?
Posted by: kevin at January 28, 2009 11:19 AM (+nV09)
3
Indeed, Kevin, my husband said that, had I confronted this lady and said that we didn't invade Iran, she might very well have answered, "Not that WE know..."
Ah, Bush. The evil genius. Who is dumber than a monkey.
Posted by: Sarah at January 28, 2009 11:24 AM (TWet1)
4
That about sums up the incredible lack of actual rational, logical thought, doesn't it? So frustrating!
Posted by: Lucy at January 28, 2009 11:58 AM (HGFog)
5
Your husband makes me laugh so hard!
Posted by: airforcewife at January 28, 2009 01:46 PM (Fb2PC)
6
Some of the other bizarre stuff I heard about Bush: He planned 9/11. He was going to use all the shuttered (from the bad economy) factories and turn them into concentration-like camps for liberals. He was going to invade Iran and then 'invoke' the draft to clean out the inner city ghetto's.
Yeaaaaah. Being a red dot in a blue state is really really hard some days.
Posted by: Mare at January 29, 2009 03:24 AM (APbbU)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 24, 2009
NEW FOR THE SAKE OF NEW
Apparently there's been a suggestion made that, now that we have a black president, our schools should stop teaching
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and
To Kill a Mockingbird. The reasoning, as also blockquoted
by Joanne Jacobs, is:
Those books are old, and weÂ’re ready for new.
David Foster, who has made me think and smile for five years, reminded us of something he wrote back in 2003.
As C S Lewis said: If you want to destroy an infantry unit, you cut it off from its neighboring units. If you want to destroy a generation, you cut it off from previous generations. (Approximate quote.)
How better to conduct such destruction than to tell people that previous generations were ignorant and that we have nothing to learn from them?
I recommend reading his whole blog entry, as well as the Stuart Buck link he provides.
In the comments at Jacobs' blog, someone said that To Kill a Mockingbird gets less relevant the older you get. I 100% disagree. I read it first as a high schooler and then again when I was engaged. I wept through many passages, over the kind of man and father Atticus Finch is. I am certain that if I read it again now, now that we are trying to have children of our own, it would seem even more poignant.
Dangit, I'm gonna do that. I'm adding it to my George Bush 2009 Reading Challenge.
Posted by: Sarah at
12:27 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 252 words, total size 2 kb.
1
All old books must go. There are only three books anyone needs: the Qur'an,
Dreams from My Father, and
The Audacity of Hope. Everything else should be recycled so schoolchildren can get free copies of
The New York Times. (
Omerica needs to catch up with France!) The latter two books will boost the already incalculable power of
the Obama Effect! And if students can't actually read, the indOctrinatOr, I mean, teacher can just tell the yOung piOneers Obama's
incredible life story:
Opiyo sired Obama, Obama sired Onyango, Onyango sired Barack, Barack sired Barack, and Barack became President of the United States of America ...
Once he arrived in Manhattan knowing only one person, an illegal immigrant from Pakistan; failing to find him he spent the night sleeping in a Harlem alley, washing next morning at a fire hydrant. 25 years later he was the President of the United States ...
Dreams from My Father
is an autobiography written before the events. Its task is not to sanitize and rectify memories; its task is to help its author to reach a position where he can take the actions in the first place.
Ohhhh, the actiOns! I get a thrill going up my leg just thinking about
bOOndOggles!
Don't worry, pOetry will also be part of the govschool curriculum. Who could forget
airforcewife's immortal haiku?" Imagine millions of little girls saying that as they cuddle their free
Sasha and Malia dolls? And boys too. We mustn't be sexist! Mind cOntrOl for all!
Posted by: kevin at January 24, 2009 02:59 PM (y3aIN)
2
Thanks for the nice words, Sarah!
Posted by: david foster at January 24, 2009 03:09 PM (ke+yX)
3
I first read
To Kill A Mockingbird around the Fall of 1966 when I was in 8th grade.
We spent considerable time examining the differences between how Calpurnia spoke at Atticus' house vs when she was at her church.
The book is full of "teachable moments" that still need addressing today ... The Cunninghams Sr and Jr ... Mrs Dubose fighting her addition ... Atticus ... Heck Tate ... the Rabid Dog ... Mr Ewell (another rabid dog) ... the financial situation of the Depression where some people had to pay through means other than money ... and Boo Radley.
So many things to talk about ... that are still worth talking about in our High Schools.
Posted by: The Thomas at January 24, 2009 04:38 PM (CMpbs)
4
To Kill A Mockingbird is one of my favorite books of all time. One of my very favorite movie scenes comes from the film version.
Guess along with my firearms and ammo I need to pick up some copies of the classics? Cripes.
Posted by: Guard Wife at January 24, 2009 05:37 PM (IADCv)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
PRIDE
Last year I wrote about how I'm
not a citizen of the world. Victor Davis Hanson
explains why:
Whether Obama is President or McCain had won, no matter; it is still the US, and as a Jacksonian I pretty much pull for America--all the time. I am not a Socratic citizen of the world--given the thugs that rule most of Africa, the creepy places such as Iran or Russia or North Korea, the land of the Lotus-eaters in Europe, or the tribal dictatorships I've seen in the Middle East
His main point is annoyance at how, all of a sudden, a bunch of people are now proud to be Americans again. Like those ridiculous celebrities who pledge to say hi to their neighbors now that Obama is president. Over and over I've seen people on Facebook and in articles say that they can finally stop pretending to be Canadian and be happy to be Americans again. What a douchey thing to say.
I am disappointed that Barack Obama is our president. But the United States is still a way better place to live than anywhere else on the planet. I'm still proud to live here, even though I think Pres. Obama is going to take us further in a direction I don't like and don't want to live in.
I know Europeans who are ashamed of their countries. I know more of them who just simply don't care, who don't know their own anthems, don't wear their own flags, and don't have a single ounce of national pride. I pity them. I wish they knew what it was like to feel what I feel, to be so happy to be a citizen of the greatest country ever conceived.
And for the record, I have never pretended to be Canadian...
Posted by: Sarah at
10:46 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 301 words, total size 2 kb.
1
I'm finally proud to be an Omerican, but this citizen of the wOrld isn't giving up his fake Canadian passport yet!
But the United States is still a way better place to live than anywhere else on the planet.
How can you be sure? Even though you've lived in France, Sweden, Germany, and traveled throughout Eurabia, you have yet to taste the paradise of the Democratic People's Republic of North Korea. I'm keeping my tickets for Pyongyang just in case Palin becomes president.
I know Europeans who are ashamed of their countries. I know more of them who just simply don't care, who don't know their own anthems, don't wear their own flags, and don't have a single ounce of national pride. I pity them. I wish they knew what it was like to feel what I feel, to be so happy to be a citizen of the greatest country ever conceived.
You won't have to feel sorry for them for much longer. They will know the words of the shahada. They will wear the crescent - and the hijab - with pride. They will be Eurabians. They will be citizens of Allah's nation. Will you envy them?
Posted by: kevin at January 24, 2009 01:31 PM (y3aIN)
2
In the interest of full disclosure I have actually pretended to be Canadian...not out of shame but I have a penchant for exploring the seedier parts of the foreign countries I visit and American's are usually more of a target...
I consider it more a deep cover tactic than a reject of my identity...
A hotel, gas station or tourist trap? Yup, I'm American...A bar in an alleyway where people are playing Russian Roulette in the backroom? OH CANADA! OUR HOME AND NATIVE LAND (which reminds me I really should learn the rest of the words if I'm going to keep up the facade).
Posted by: David at January 25, 2009 04:55 PM (AEMm3)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
RUSH
Prez Zings GOP:
President Obama warned Republicans on Capitol Hill today that they need to quit listening to radio king Rush Limbaugh if they want to get along with Democrats and the new administration.
Who said anything about getting along? Despite all the talk of bipartisanship and reaching across the aisle, most people I know have core values that they don't compromise on. Rush Limbaugh's program is about those core values.
Deltasierra says it best:
People are allowed to be unhappy with Obama's election, and they're allowed to be critical of him and of the government.
I will be critical of the government till the day I die. It's the only way to stay free in a free nation. That's Limbaugh's job, and that of those who share his beliefs. Don't disparage him his freedom to speak what he believes.
Just FYI: He has repeatedly said, especially in the last few days, that he doesn't want Obama to be a failed president. He wants his socialist policies to fail.
I agree with him. I don't want government health care. I don't want my tax dollars to pay for other people's useless lives – and I don't want anybody else's tax dollars to fund my life! I don't want to try to be friends with terrorists and I don't want them in our jails, or set free to terrorize some more. I don't like Obama's policies. I have never made a secret of this, and neither has Rush Limbaugh or any other conservative talk show host I respect.
It makes me crazy that now that Obama has taken office, I am expected to put all my objections aside and adore this new president. I'm supposed to think of him as a blank slate – as if all his campaign promises just vaporized after he took the oath of office.
Sorry. No can do. I don't have warm, fuzzy feelings – I'm filled with a passion to keep our country free from the things Obama has promised he will try to do.
I too want to keep our country free from Obama's promises. Rush spreads that same message to 13 million people. That's a lot better than my 300...
Posted by: Sarah at
09:04 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 369 words, total size 2 kb.
1
The question is how to spread that message to more than 13 million. There are limits to expansion. Many people simply won't listen, not because they are Leftists, but just because they unthinkingly go with the flOw.
Maybe the better question is how to control the flow. I'm not necessarily talking about seizing political power. The real power lies with the intellectuals whose ideas are in
the books that Bush read - and which underlie the pOlicies that you fear. We still live in Marx' shadow. Who will be the counter-Marx?
Posted by: Amritas at January 24, 2009 12:50 PM (y3aIN)
2
President Obama warned Republicans on Capitol Hill today that they need to quit listening to radio king Rush Limbaugh if they want to get along with Democrats and the new administration.
Obama is so merciful, Barack bless himself. If I were in charge, I'd just shut down Limbaugh and arrest his Repugnant Party listeners. But he hath deigned to warn the demons. Such compassion is only second to Allah's.
deltasierra,
I don't want government health care. I don't want my tax dollars to pay for other people's useless lives – and I don't want anybody else's tax dollars to fund my life!
I, I, I, me, me, me. What about
us? Remember "we the people"? We want free health care. We don't care
if it's never worked before:
It is one of the painful signs of our times that millions of people are so easily swayed by rhetoric that they show virtually no interest at all in finding out the hard facts. Any number of other countries already have government-controlled medical professions. Yet few Americans show any interest in what actually happens to medical care in those countries.
Instead, we are being lured into a one-way process — much like entering a Venus fly trap — by the oldest of all confidence rackets, the promise of something for nothing.
Fortunately, Sally C. Pipes is one of the few who has explored the reality of government-controlled medical treatment in Canada and other countries.
Bah. None of those nations ever had an Obama, though they wish they did. It is now day five of his eOn. The old economic constraints - "supply," "demand," nonsense like that - are gone.
Anything is pOssible, especially if you fund it for us. That's all capitalists are good for. Looting. Wealth just
exists, and we Great Leaders exist to take it! Obama understands that central truth.
Who are you to say our lives are useless? Where would your society be without my Sovereign Kingdom University and other bastions of les bien-pensants? Stuck in the Europpressive past, no doubt. Your taxes fund the faculty that drags the eeeevil invaders of Turtle Island forward into the future!
And don't worry about your life being funded. While your neighbors get lifetime gOvernment jObs, you can enjoy poverty. You Rightists keep dreaming of Ayn Rand's Atlantis, but you'll be reduced to selling hot dogs until all non-halal food is banned.
I don't want to try to be friends with terrorists and I don't want them in our jails, or set free to terrorize some more.
But you Rightists always talk about "freedom." That's all it is, just talk. I bet you didn't like it when Obama hung out with his buddy Bill. So why can't I be friends with Osama?
At least we agree that terrorists shouldn't be in jails. In fact, I don't think there should be any jails. I love freedom. That's why I'm a liberal.
Posted by: kevin at January 24, 2009 01:19 PM (y3aIN)
3
Ha! She'll be tickled pink that she was quoted.
Sig
Posted by: Sig at January 24, 2009 04:20 PM (fPHZv)
4
Whee! I feel honored!
Sig had to tell me I'd been quoted, because I was getting behind again – didn't use the computer much this weekend.
I should rant more often!
Thanks, Sarah!
Posted by: Deltasierra at January 25, 2009 08:52 PM (fPHZv)
5
Hey, now. Remember what Leonidas did with his 300. It's not the QUANTITY of your readers, it's the quality
Posted by: Lissa at January 26, 2009 08:00 AM (eSfKC)
6
The Spartans only needed 300 ;o)
Posted by: Pia at January 26, 2009 09:35 AM (uY6sE)
7
Lissa,
Apart from kevin, quality is not a problem among the 300 - οἱ τριακόσιοι.
Long live Queen Leaina - Βασίλισσα Λέαινα!
("Leonidas" contains "leon" = "lion," and "Leaina" is "lioness.")
Posted by: Amritas at January 26, 2009 10:16 AM (+nV09)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 22, 2009
BOONDOGGLE
I am neither an economist nor a historian, but this article at
Newsweek made my eyebrows raise:
The New New Deal: The WPA fixed the economy by creating unusual careers. Should that be the plan for today's unemployed Americans?
I actually was under the impression that WWII fixed the economy, but perhaps it was the fact that
In our nation's capital, more than 100 men were paid to scare off pigeons. In Brooklyn, men and women worked as fire hydrant decorators. And in Boston, the government sponsored a project to make fish chowder. Indian tribes were paid to create new totem poles and other artifacts. "Rhythmic dancing"—whatever that means—was also sponsored, as was craft-making, or what the Boy Scouts might have called "boondoggling." In fact, the term "boondoggle," meaning any job or activity that is wasteful or trivial, was inspired by just these sorts of WPA projects. The best example from the FDR years? Government-funded research on the production and efficiency of safety pins.
The link to this article is "Will a New WPA Create Boondoggle Jobs?" It sounds like the answer is yes. That previous paragraph is in defense of the WPA, for heaven's sake.
"As we know from watching Congress debate the recovery plan, lawmakers have a great ability to let [random projects] slide through," says Nick Taylor, the author of "American Made," a history of the WPA. "But you would hope that these new jobs would at least be interesting."
"Interesting." Not, you know, effective or necessary.
"Most of this work is not rocket science," Eisenbrey adds, mentioning the nearly 800,000 skilled construction workers currently unemployed. What will these men and women build? Unlike 70 years ago, we should expect largely incremental improvements to existing structures rather than new projects built completely from scratch.
"Since so many of these new plans involve laying pipes in the ground, retrofitting buildings or improving public transportation," says Peter King of the American Public Works Association, "we're not going to be able look at different places and say, 'This project came from this investment.'"
Ah, I see. So we won't really know what our money is actually being spent on, and we won't be able to point to any improvements and say that they were a direct result of this new WPA. But we definitely need to do this to "fix the economy." Just trust us.
And this is my favorite part, the bold being mine.
So while we may not end this economic downturn with a slew of new parks and pools, we could end up with other unexpected benefits: for example, completely public wireless Internet access; a shorter commute on newly decongested highways; or, for those who live in cities, subway cars that aren't so crowded.
In an article about how the original WPA fixed the economy, the journalist says that we "may not end this economic downturn" with any of these projects, but at least we'll all get some free stuff out of it. And by "free," I mean "at a huge waste of taxpayer money for make-work nonsense."
Oh, this part is good too:
Alas, financing the arts isn't a priority in the new recovery plan, so bohemian types might want to consider teaching, fire-fighting or policing, all public sector jobs that will get a boost along with the infrastructure investment. Not interested? The WPA was often criticized (and occasionally challenged in court) for not providing the sort of employment that Americans were seeking.
"Alas"? I say more like thank heavens.
"Not providing the sort of employment Americans were seeking." If that doesn't make you guffaw, I don't know what does. So supply had nothing to do with demand. The Obama administration will invent a bunch of green jobs, and if a green job isn't what you want, tough toenails for you. We create jobs that we think are for The Greater Good, demand be damned.
Only in retrospect, and with the sheen of Walker Evans' photography, has the WPA gained glory.
Snort. If the glory of your program is only to be found in photos of people doing jobs that didn't need to be done, your program is hogwash.
The last line of the article:
Now get to work, Congress, so we all can work, too.
First of all, is this an article or an editorial? Secondly, gag. Pass this into law, Congress, so we can start wasting a bunch of taxpayer money to make everything eco-friendly.
Incidentally, via Greg Mankiw, the effects will not be felt for quite some time:
It will take years before an infrastructure spending program proposed by President-elect Barack Obama will boost the economy, according to congressional economists.
[...]
The economy has been in recession for more than a year, but many economists believe a recovery may begin by the end of 2009. That would mean that most of the infrastructure money wouldn't hit the economy until it's already on the mend.
The economy will recover on its own, like the Great Depression economy eventually did, and everyone will heap praise on Obama because his make-work silliness just happened to coincide with the rebound.
Yeesh.
It's only day three of this administration? I'm going to have a heart attack.
Posted by: Sarah at
08:41 AM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 867 words, total size 6 kb.
1
Our infrastructure desperately needs improvement. The thing is, the reason that the money hasn't been there for the improvements thus far is because it's been going to stupid shit. Like that poop sculpture "art".
Money that goes into NEA coffers can't go into fixing water mains that are decrepit. In Maryland, one burst about a month ago and nearly killed people.
My father just retired from being a City Manager. Infrastructure is expensive to repair, and because so many people would rather commission a mural that everyone can see instead of spending the money to put in new sewer pipes that no one can see (and no one notices until the shit literally hits your basement fan) the money gets allocated into various pots.
Not every budget has a Social Security pot that can be raided indiscriminantly, if the state passes on money to a municipality, they generally earmark it for a specific purpose. If it is used for anything else, even in a sewer emergency, the municipality will not be given any more state money.
I don't truly like the idea of "creating" jobs out of nothing. But even more I do not like the idea of stupid and meaningless jobs being created because they are "fulfilling" when we desperately do need infrastructure repair. And when I say desperately, I'm not exaggerating. Speak to some public works directors and city managers sometime. Pipes have a shelf life, roads have a shelf life, bridges, sewer plants, and power plants need upgrades to keep working. And they haven't been getting them so that the local schools can have a few more computers that the kids use to access MySpace and yahoo chat.
Of course, laying sewer pipe isn't fulfilling...
Posted by: airforcewife at January 22, 2009 09:36 AM (Fb2PC)
Posted by: tim at January 22, 2009 10:20 AM (nno0f)
3
"completely public wireless Internet access; a shorter commute on newly decongested highways; "
Yes, because everyone knows that the government taking away our money, juggling it for a while and then spitting some of it at unneeded and inefficient public sector jobs is EXACTLY how innovation and technological improvement come about.
*blink, blink*
Posted by: Lissa at January 22, 2009 10:33 AM (fHdl7)
4
It's only day three of this administration? I'm going to have a heart attack.
Is this a good time to mention that I've been working on developing a rather [...hmm, perhaps "Soviet" is a good word...] sense of humor, with a mind toward what's coming? Honestly, if I can't laugh about it, I'll cry, among other things! ;-)
AFW makes a good point, too - the projects could and should at least be of some benefit and maintain the obligations we've been "gifted" with by previous generations.
And I still object to the "eat the rich" class warfare policies that will pay for them.
Posted by: kannie at January 22, 2009 10:37 AM (iT8dn)
5
AFW,
Great Leaders like me always have a better sense of priorities than selfish capitalists who only think about themselves. Take my idol Mao, for instance. Instead of wasting money on properly maintaining dull, shoddy dams that endanger millions, he spent it on the Bomb. Blame the Americans. If they didn't terrify the world with their weapons, there would have been no need for the Chairman to defend himself at great expense. If you were in his shoes - or Ahmadinejad's (Barack bless him) - you'd do the same thing.
Lissa,
Remember, al-Gore invented the Internet. And behold the technological might of the Soviet Union! You know you'd love to drive
a Communist car instead of a Gaia-defacing SUV. In
MiG Pilot, John Barron wrote about how Americans were shocked to learn that the
MiG-25 Foxbat still used "primitive" vacuum tubes. Obviously, they were in denial about the might of collectivist creativity.
kannie,
A Soviet sense of humor is a must. Even you will learn to laugh at the deluded free marketers. Or else.
Enjoy the eOn! Over a thousand more days to go! Every day is Obama Day! OHHHH!!
Posted by: kevin at January 22, 2009 11:08 AM (+nV09)
6
Sigh...I give. The battle is uphill and I'm tired, give one those blankity, blank green jobs. I'm climbing on the O-wagon.
Posted by: Pamela at January 22, 2009 11:40 AM (tqojX)
Posted by: kevin at January 22, 2009 10:10 PM (y3aIN)
8
Actually, regression analysis of economic data shows that our economy is usually depressed/regressed in the years prior to any war, but recovers and is on the upswing prior to the outbreak of war. The vast spending that goes on during wartime increases recovery time, until the boys all come home and the job market is re-filled to bursting.
Posted by: Chuck at January 23, 2009 02:17 AM (bQVIy)
9
Once upon a time, Chairman Mao thought that local communities should be more self sustaining, and that with public service and hard work, the peasants could collectively outproduce the industrialized nations of the world.
Steel! With good steel one can build almost anything. Steel production became a priority for every village, and they built local furnaces to extract iron from ore to create this steel.
Problem was, nobody knew how to make steel. It was a lot easier to melt down anything that was of steel construction and make bars out of that. When Chairman Mao came long to see how well the peasants were doing, they would present him with the refashioned artifacts. Pleased with their efforts, he asked then to do even more.
Alas, steel products became in short supply as they were converted to girders and shipped elsewhere. These products were things like plows, so there were only hand tools in which to bring in the crops. Famine resulted.
Rather than tell Dear Leader that this idea wasn't working as intended, they kept up their efforts by displaying the same steel girders over and over, moving them from village to village to be presented for inspection. And so the sad process continued, with Mao never knowing any better until it was far too late. But that's OK, because it was only the peasants that were starving.
So yes, let us take the useful fruits of our labor and convert them to useless things! Those in power will never know the difference, and will feel good about themselves, while the rest of us...well, I suppose I just didn't say "yes we can" with enough vigor.
Posted by: deskmerc at January 23, 2009 05:37 AM (o/QXM)
10
deskmerc...the Chinese steelmaking story reminded me of a sad but funny story from the old Soviet Union...I posted it along with an almost (but not quite) as bad story from the capitalist US:
link
Posted by: david foster at January 23, 2009 06:14 AM (ke+yX)
11
Thanks for all the stories, David and Deskmerc.
The only story I have that comes even close is that our manager at the craft store has to waste precious time every week counting individual bandaids in the first aid kits for "inventory" purposes. She has FAR more important things to do in the store, but someone has decided the store needs X number of bandaids, by golly.
Also, the new CEO of Michaels apparently hates the color red, which was the official color of the store and logo, so they're spending Lord knows how much money to change the colors from red to black. But they laid me off from my knitting job because *I* was costing them too much money, getting a paycheck of $50 per month. Sigh.
Posted by: Sarah at January 23, 2009 10:45 AM (TWet1)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 18, 2009
GRRR
I knew I was setting myself up to be irritated when I clicked on the MSN link called
Are We A New Nation Now? But I didn't really think it was worth blogging about until I got to the end.
And 2009 is only the beginning of the story. According to Pew, if current trends continue, the U.S. population will rise from 296 million in 2005 to 438 million in 2050. Eighty-two percent—let me repeat that: 82 percent—of the increase will be attributable to immigrants arriving after 2005 and to their descendants. By that point, whites may make up only 47 percent of the country, ending centuries of a majority-white America.
Will the journey be smooth? That is doubtful. Politics can quickly turn mean. In hard economic times there is often a search for an "other" on which to blame the problems of life. In the wake of a possible terrorist attack, fear could easily lead to tension, resentment and discord. The good news about America, though, is that for all of our nativist fevers and periodic witch hunts, we tend, often after having exhausted every other option, to do what is right.
"Do what is right." You know, vote Democrat.
Grrr.
Posted by: Sarah at
04:50 PM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 204 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Yes, "right" is Left, because the Right is racist. Read between the lines:
In hard economic times there is often a search for an "other" on which to blame the problems of life.
Need I specify who will supposedly "search" for whom? Who will supposedly have "nativist fevers" and initiate "witch hunts"?
But let's put politics aside for a moment and talk demographics.
"Current trends" don't continue forever. If the US economy goes downhill, this country will become a less attractive destination for immigrants. (OTOH, even a fallen US would still be desirable to many who live in true misery.)
In any case, there does not seem to be any significant demand to close the door. Many oppose amnesty for illegals, but few want to cut down on legal immigration. Questions for other readers:
1. Is restricting legal immigration a good idea, and if so, what sort of restrictions would be desirable: e.g., given our high-tech economy, would university graduates be preferred?
2. In particular, given the current war, is it desirable or even possible to prevent jihadists from immigrating? How can jihadists be distinguished from the majority of nonviolent Muslims? Is a small number of jihadist immigrants a necessary price to pay for an open door? Does it make sense to fight jihadists there if they can still come here?
3. Is more assimilation desirable? If so, how will this assimilation take place, and to what degree? For example, is it possible to be a "good American" without English? If America is a proposition nation, should it be OK to understand the Constitution and other fundamentals in another language? To vote in another language? Is Americanism intrinsically bound to the English language?
4. What will happen to affirmative action once more than half the population is eligible for it?
5. For the Rightists here: The Democratic Party is perceived to be the party of diversity. Should the Republican party reach out to nonwhites, and if so, how can it do this without tokenism, pandering, and patronizing?
Posted by: Amritas at January 18, 2009 09:30 PM (y3aIN)
2
I'm not a rightist, but can I answer #5?
I think that Republicans can reach out to non-whites by virtue of being visible. Currently, we have a political situation where what you DO does not matter, what you SAY you do/believe/will do matters.
The only way anyone can combat that is to actually go out and do things.
Mississippi was rebuilt after Katrina by churches of people who took pilgrimages to work. Churches that sometimes get recognized, but really get lost in the complaining about a still stagnating New Orleans. And churches that are generally more "right" than "left".
Rick Warren, while not a favorite of mine in many areas, gets attacked for some of his stands and yet his church has an active ministry for HIV+ as well as huge programs to provide food and shelter for the homeless.
If conservatives want conservatives to be seen as a force for good rather than a force of people with way too much money; conservatives need to be more visible in what they do for the community. That is the best and most honest kind of outreach. Not insipid speeches about how everyone was wrong before and things will get better given to organizations that basically exist to perpetuate victim stereotypes.
But, I could be wrong. Maybe you're just evil and beyond redemption.
Posted by: airforcewife at January 19, 2009 07:02 AM (Fb2PC)
3
AFW,
Thank you for your reply.
Is there any evidence for a correlation between increased Rightist community involvement and more votes for Republicans? Can conservative private and religious charities compete with state benefits for the loyalties of their recipients? A cynic could say that the Right gives, but the Left gives more. Should the Right play the giving game?
I completely agree with you about "insipid speeches." That kind of talk isn't just cheap; it's toxic.
Who is the "you" in your last line? Me specifically, or the Republicans in the audience? (It'd be nice if colloquial English had retained a singular thou/plural you distinction.) I am not and never have been a Republican.
Posted by: Amritas at January 19, 2009 08:54 AM (y3aIN)
4
Good questions & thoughtful responses.
As a more conservative person, I prefer to decide where my charitable dollars and efforts go. It's hard for some, I'm sure, to realize that when the government hands out cash & prizes, that money comes from me too. The government doesn't generate it's own income, but it certainly does rely on me to do so.
Until people are willing to be intellectually honest on a large scale and quit throwing the baby out with the bath water, so to speak, it will be very difficult to make a noticeable paradigm shift.
Posted by: Guard Wife at January 19, 2009 09:44 AM (N3nNT)
5
I have an errant apostrophe in that comment & it bothers me. I can't change it. If Sarah takes pity on me & does, I will be grateful.
Posted by: Guard Wife at January 19, 2009 09:45 AM (N3nNT)
6
I meant "you're" in the aggregate sense.
But I agree also with Guard Wife's last sentence.
I think the best way to introduce different ideals to Americans, and in particular bring the good works of those more conservative groups to the forefront is to have a lot more involvement with education. Seriously - that is where it all starts.
For those of us who do not buy the leftist line hook, line, and sinker - we should really rethink where we send our children to learn. The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world, right?
We homeschool because we move a lot, but also because I want my children to know my values. I'm not opposed to them thinking for themselves or disagreeing with me. Geez, I disagree with my VERY liberal father and grandmother quite a bit! And I was totally steeped in the ideology growing up, let me tell you. I phone banked at Planned Parenthood fundraisers when I was 12 (now I'm very solidly pro-life, believe it or not).
But my children better darn well understand what they're rebelling against and be able to articulate their own arguments against it. And as a teacher I know for a fact that they will NOT learn those skills in most public schools and a great many private schools.
There should be alternatives for parents - not everyone has the ability to work from home like I do, or to depend on their husband's income as much as we do. If conservatives really do care about they future, they will work to MAKE those alternatives, not sit around and wait for vouchers that may never come or demand that families make sacrifices that they may not be able to withstand. If you (aggregate) are conservative and concerned about kids, you (aggregate) should be doing something for their education. Period. And personally. Whether you have kids school age or not.
But education is the only way to start. The ONLY way.
Posted by: airforcewife at January 19, 2009 03:04 PM (Fb2PC)
7
@Amritas -
As a former Republican (and trying really hard to be Constitutionalist now), here are my initial thoughts (aside from "wow, there are a lot of thought-provoking questions today!"):
#1: Nope, I'm not in favor of imposing any additional limits (or even some of what we already have) on legal immigration. My idea: let everyone who wants to build come put their efforts into building the country, bailing the water and righting the ship! ;-)
#2: It does still make sense to fight radical Islamists around the world, I suppose; I've been conflicted for a while about the morality and Constitutionality of it, though. RE: the immigration aspect of it, screening for known terrorist ties makes sense, but I honestly don't know enough about existing procedure to make that sort of call. I'd probably err on the side of allowing people opportunity, since I really believe that the majority of good people can always overcome the bad minority. In fact, a good minority can overcome a bad majority. Good > Evil.
#3: ABSOLUTELY. I LOVE other languages & a lot of cultures, and I think we should all learn more than just English and "el shoe-o" Spanish as part of being educated human beings. But yes, PLEASE let's standardize our language of social intercourse. It's just practicality, IMHO. English is the international language of flight, commerce, etc.; it used to be French, but since it's English now, (right?), we should quit trying to find a guilt trip and just standardize our "internal commerce" accordingly.
#4: Dunno, LOL... but won't that be a hoot? :-) Seriously, though, I'm not holding out hope for the end of orchestrated class warfare, though, which is what a lot of the country's race problems seem to boil down to... power-hungry people using others for their own aggrandizement. I'm sure it wouldn't go away, even if the "race roles" those power brokers cling to, swap places... and heaven only knows what the bureaucrats will do then.
#5: Ignore our pigmentation entirely, regardless of what happens. Quit viewing people as blocs and start looking at them as individuals. Stop the INFERNAL STRATEGIZING, politicians!!! I think community and individual service show our "true colors" much better than words, which powermongers and talking heads just ignore or deny by spouting their poisonous dogma, anyway. We're all human beings, and we recognize when real care is shown to us. If we lift each other up as individuals and work charitably with each other at our most basic levels of life, I am *confident* that the rest will follow.
Posted by: kannie at January 19, 2009 03:06 PM (iT8dn)
8
And a big AMEN to AFW's education and thinking sentiments, and Guard Wife's intellectual honesty point!!!
Posted by: kannie at January 19, 2009 03:14 PM (iT8dn)
9
Thanks to everyone for their responses.
I'd be interested in hearing from the liberals in the audience about how to sway the other side.
GW,
Before we can even work on mass-scale intellectual honest, I'd like people to be more intellectual, period. I see too many people operating on instinct and feelings, not thought. That might have been sufficient to get by in the old days, but we live in a more complex world. However, I don't expect the human species to change soon. We're still cavepeople. We're not that far removed from the Flintstones.
AFW,
What do you think people without school-age kids could do to promote education?
I have never heard of children phonebanking. It sounds manipulative, regardless of the right or wrong of the cause.
kannie,
I appreciate how you addressed all my questions. Not that anyone is obligated to answer even one of them.
Posted by: Amritas at January 19, 2009 08:24 PM (y3aIN)
10
I meant "intellectual honest
y" - ack!
Posted by: Amritas at January 19, 2009 08:26 PM (y3aIN)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 13, 2009
BROUGHT TO YOU BY CARL'S JR
Today is the first day in a long time that my husband has gone to work and I've stayed home. When he's here, I stick to him like glue. And there have even been a couple of days where I worked while he was at home. Hence the lack of blogging; who wants to sit at the computer when the coolest person on the planet is in her living room?
Yesterday at work, I witnessed another example of what Rachel Lucas would label as Idiocracy Watch. Three women were trying to figure out the price of an item that was $5 and 70% off. They never even came close to guessing, just urging each other to figure it out. One of them eventually took her cell phone out and said, "Five...times...seven...zero...aw man, there's no percent function." So she deleted the math and started over, ending up in the same conundrum. It was what plants crave, seriously. Percent function? Dang. Finally, they turned to me and asked me what the price would be. I said that half of $5 is $2.50 and half of that again is $1.25, so it'd be somewhere around $1.40. They looked at me like I had explained relativistic physics.
Oy.
I know I bragged about knitting math, but really, I'm not that good at math. I can do arithmetic and algebra. And usually I prefer scratch paper. I would've struggled for a few moments to figure out 38% of a number. But 70% of a nice round number like five? Yeesh. And I was even WRONG by ten cents, so shame on me a little. But that was off the top of my head in about 15 seconds, so close enough. Closer than they got, which was "I was told there would be no math in shopping."
Posted by: Sarah at
03:13 AM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 313 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Wonder how many of them had college degrees?...**graduate** degrees, maybe?
Posted by: david foster at January 13, 2009 03:59 AM (ke+yX)
2
Um, next time tell 'em to multiply ten percent by 7? So 50 cents times 7 would've got them down the path and they might've left a bread crumb or two, even. I find it amazing that lots of people can't calculate a 20% tip in their heads. Seriously, 10% times 2? Pathetic. Their heads would've exploded if you'd tried to explain that putting a decimal point in makes it a percent for their cellphone, no?
Posted by: Betsy Wuebker at January 13, 2009 04:06 AM (ZplKW)
3
Oh, I'm such a math idiot. It's not even funny. But I would have done that EXACTLY the way you did it.
I just asked my 10 year old how she would have figured it out, and she said she would have taken 70 cents off every dollar and counted up by 30s.
I asked my 8 year old and she said, "I have no idea." I'm going to have to work on that one.
But that's how I judge things - if my 10 year old can figure it out without a problem, well then... If my 8 year old has no problem figuring something out, then I REALLY roll my eyes. And if the 5 year old boy knows the answer? Then I might have to intervene with sarcasm.
Posted by: airforcewife at January 13, 2009 04:31 AM (Fb2PC)
4
Saw you over at The Trooper's Wife. Glad I did! Enjoy your stuff. Will be back.
Posted by: Meadowlark at January 13, 2009 05:25 AM (+7zhB)
5
I would subtract 70% from 100%, and multiply that (30%) by $5.
I've already told you this story, but for the amusement of your readers ...
Four years ago at McDonald's, I ordered a little over $2 ($1 fries + a large drink) and was charged about $4. The cashier wouldn't believe me when I said I was being overcharged. After all, the register said I owed $4.xx. (It hadn't occurred to him that he had pressed the wrong button[s?].) I stood my ground and fortunately the manager came along, believed me, and I only had to pay $2.xx.
I do have a new postscript for you: that McDonald's has been demolished!
Posted by: Amritas at January 13, 2009 06:46 AM (+nV09)
6
a little over $2
No, more like about $2.40. Still, I was being overcharged. I actually told the teenage cashier that a dollar fries plus a $1.xx drink is not four dollars and he still wouldn't believe me! 1 + 1 = 4!?
Idiocracy isn't just a movie. We're living in it right now.
Posted by: Amritas at January 13, 2009 07:19 AM (+nV09)
7
I'm a math dunce - but I at least know how to use a decimal point on a calculator! I would rather type the decimal than use the percent function, anyway. I'm not sure I remember how to use the percent function, actually . . .
I'm getting better about figuring it out in my head, but if I'm rushed or distracted (it's deep thinking for me!), I only get flustered and lose all mathematical capabilities. Yay for cell phone calculators!
Posted by: Deltasierra at January 13, 2009 10:47 AM (hRWl6)
8
Oooo, shopping math. Fun!
10% of $5.00 is 50 cents...just move that old decimal point over 1 place.
50 cents x 7 = $3.50
$5.00 - $3.50 = $1.50
Ta-dah! And I STINK at math.
Posted by: Guard Wife at January 13, 2009 11:43 AM (N3nNT)
9
I would have just done the 30%. Don't know why, but that's the way I think. to me 30% is more "user friendly" than 70%. Personal idiosyncracy.
Posted by: Ruth H at January 13, 2009 01:01 PM (Y4oAO)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 07, 2009
RANT
AirForceWife sent me a link to a
heck of a rant...
IÂ’m pissed off by how soft many in our nation have become. How whimpy the tone, how spineless the resolve. What happened to that brutally real notion that people should be held responsible for his or her actions? Nowadays, it always seems to be someone elseÂ’s fault, whatever it is. Got a life of poverty, itÂ’s rich folks doing it to you.
Alcohol addiction, substance abuse, your mother never said she loves you. Having trouble finding work, it’s the white, black, purple guys keeping you down. Your car company is going under, it’s the unfair business practices abroad and an economic downturn. Hey, nimrods – newsflash. LIFE IS HARD. The End. Get used to it, suck it up, get some spine, invent some if you have none, and GET ON WITH IT!!!!
Posted by: Sarah at
09:02 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 145 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Oh. My. Word. Thank you Sarah & AFW for that!!! :-) I've liked that guy since Alien Nation, LOL... (and I'm sure that his frequently-used acronym means "Forget That Silliness" ;-)
Jokes aside, it really is heartening to see more people willing to put
serious chips down to stand up against tyranny. There are more of us out here all the time! :-)
Posted by: kannie at January 07, 2009 10:16 AM (iT8dn)
2
AMEM! Honestly, I wish more people would feel this way instead of defending people's avoidance of responsibility. Be thankful for the blessings you have and appreciate the ones you earn. Life is hard for everyone - it's all relative. Too often the will power to overcome adversity is what separates the strong from the weak. Not skin color, economic backgrounds from birth, etc. I've know plenty of rich kids to piss away their money and plenty of smart kids to throw away opportunities. There were times I was working 3 jobs to support myself. Not because I wanted to, and it wasn't always fun. Who the @#$!@# wants to work? It would be awesome if we were all rich and could travel the world 24/7, but then what would we have to strive for. I have to say that I actually agreed with Phil Gramm when he said this summer this is a nation of whiners.
Posted by: BigD78 at January 07, 2009 12:27 PM (W3XUk)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 02, 2009
STOP IT
Was logging off to go to bed and saw
an article that got my blood all angered up.
Motorists are driving less and buying less gasoline, which means fuel taxes aren't raising enough money to keep pace with the cost of road, bridge and transit programs.
That has the federal commission that oversees financing for transportation talking about increasing the federal fuel tax.
STOP TAXING US! Don't you take enough already? For the love of all that is holy, find the money to fix roads in the huge sum of taxes you already take from us.
The National Commission on Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing, a 15-member panel created by Congress, is the second group in a year to call for increasing the current 18.4 cents a gallon federal tax on gasoline and the 24.4 cents a gallon tax on diesel. State fuel taxes vary from state to state.
In a report expected in late January, members of the infrastructure financing commission say they will urge Congress to raise the gas tax by 10 cents a gallon and the diesel tax by 12 cents to 15 cents a gallon. At the same time, the commission will recommend tying the fuel tax rates to inflation.
So the government takes 18¢ per gallon and wants to take 28¢. From TaxFoundation.org, "Today, U.S. consumers pay an average of 45.9 cents per gallon in gasoline taxes. The federal gasoline excise tax is 18.4 cents per gallon while the average state and local tax is 27.5 cents." The oil companies only make something like 10¢ profit on each gallon. And boy, do people like Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi like to go on and on about the obscene profits Big Oil makes.
The dilemma for Congress is that highway and transit programs are dependent for revenue on fuel taxes that are not sustainable. Many Americans are driving less and switching to more fuel-efficient cars and trucks, and a shift to new fuels and technologies like plug-in hybrid electric cars will further erode gasoline sales.
According to a draft of the financing commission's recommendations, the nation needs to move to a new system that taxes motorists according to how much they use roads.
So we're driving less and saving Mother Earth, but now that's bad because we're not paying enough in taxes. Hey, maybe they can do this thing Neal Boortz wrote about: In 2006, Oregon was considering outfitting all cars with GPS and monitoring how many miles you drive, then taxing you per mile. Hooray for Big Brother.
Charles Whittington, chairman of the American Trucking Associations, which supports a fuel tax increase as long as the money goes to highway projects, said Congress may decide to disguise a fuel tax hike as a surcharge to combat climate change.
[...]
"Instead of calling it a gas tax, call it a carbon tax," Whittington said.
Oh no, you did not just say that out loud. You're going to use PC buzzword bullcrap to hide a new tax, making people feel good because they're paying some imaginary carbon offset nonsense.
Stop taking our freaking money!
The ridiculous part of all of this is that roads is the one thing I think government should do. Sadly, instead they've wasted all our money on bailouts and wool research and rum rebates to Puerto Rico.
Grrr.
Makes me want to go drink a Sam Adams and throw some tea in a harbor.
Posted by: Sarah at
05:09 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 573 words, total size 4 kb.
1
Check out Krauthammer's suggestion for a Net-Zero gas tax. http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/949rsrgi.asp
Posted by: Eric at January 03, 2009 05:14 AM (I4B2Z)
2
One would think that less driving would also mean less *wear* on roads...ditto for the effect of vehicles which gain fuel efficiency by being *lighter*.
ATA better be careful about beating the "carbon" drum too loud, or people might remember than railroads are at least 3X as fuel-efficient as trucks.
Posted by: david foster at January 03, 2009 07:28 AM (ke+yX)
3
Yeah - reminds me of a few years ago. After 2 or 3 mild winters in a row, the local gas companies in Illinois petitioned the regulatory commission to allow them to raise rates so that their stock holders could continue to get the same return on their investment. I guess when people use less gas to heat their homes, there is less profit to pay dividends. They actually got a rate increase on that basis - I guess we are supposed to pay the same amount of money to the gas company no matter how much or little we use!
Posted by: mwknitter at January 04, 2009 09:10 PM (dXVaX)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
112kb generated in CPU 0.0274, elapsed 0.1315 seconds.
55 queries taking 0.1122 seconds, 235 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.