Hie thee, Dear Gentle Reader(s), to the Telnaes animated cartoon over at washingtonpost.com.
Although Gov. Richards made the statement about Bush I, it is very appropriate to Bush II.
Animated cartoon eyes are quite telling; notice, especially Telnaes’ ability with W’s eyes.
Sphere: Related ContentAndrew Sullivan has a snippet about President Bush’s pardons. It seems Bush is being generous to “S&L executives and others who swindled thrifts in the mid-1980’s...”
Hmmm. Wasn’t there a Bush brother, or two and a father, involved with an S&L in Colorado? Didn’t he come out without doing time? Something like Silverado? (Gotta love Google!)
Just askin’.
Sphere: Related ContentIt isn’t often, Dear Gentle Reader(s), that a liberal comes to the virtual assistance of Governor Palin, but it’s time.
This brouhaha about the press statement backdropped by a couple of turkeys being slaughtered is a lot of ado about not much.
One remembers, for instance, watching one’s mother grabbing a chicken by the head and then twirling it around until the neck was broken. (Then one remembers pouring scalding water over the chicken to prepare the feathers for plucking—not to mention the subsequent gutting!)
One also remembers one’s mother being given the knife when one’s father and neighbors were preparing to slaughter a young pig. One gains a certain respect for one’s mother who is capable of slicing open the neck of a pig, and placing a pan in the appropriate spot to catch the blood—to be used later in sausage.
A turkey being prepared for a Thanksgiving table? Bring it on. It’s the way of a carbon based world.
Go Sarah!
Sphere: Related Content…on my way to buy a new food processor, Dear Gentle Reader(s). The stock market fell to new lows.
Hmmm. Perhaps one ought to wait on new purchases…just in case one needs the money later on for macaroni and cheese boxes.
Nice going, deregulators, whoever you were/are.
Sphere: Related ContentDear Gentle Reader(s), there’s a teensy bit of evidence that the Bush II legacy has done more damage to the Justice Department than originally thought.
It’s a crisis of diminished confidence.
In today’s Los Angeles Times the lead editorial carries this title and subtitle:
Seeking Justice
Eric Holder has the credentials to be U.S. attorney general, but he may be seen as too close to President-elect Barack Obama.
Holder has the credentials, but is possibly too close to Mr. Obama? How close is too close? What was the relationship between John F and Robert Kennedy? Was AG Kennedy deemed a failure in the job as is the case with Alberto Gonzales?
The Times editorial board worries that Holden’s association with the Obama campaign might make him someone who could “be caricatured as a presidential insider.”
If the Obama administration is to be careful of caricature, then we are in for a very long 4 years.
The Gonzales Justice Department, and, to a lesser extent, the John Ashcroft Justice Department, were anomalies. The whole Bush presidency was, one is hopeful, an anomaly. That said, there shouldn’t be an undue amount of caution in supporting a President’s choice for a cabinet member just because of fear of caricature.
Let’s all get a grip, DGR(s). Our long winter of discontent is about to become a summer.
Sphere: Related ContentAndrew Sullivan, Dear Gentle Reader(s), occasionally mystifies. His obsession with Senator Clinton is well documented, but little other than his “gut” can account for it. He is rapidly amassing the same amount of virtual ink with his relentless focus on Governor Palin. Those are, however, gut mysteries which actually have no rationale beyond a sort of irrational rationale; and that’s Sullivan’s personal problem. Who cares? It’s his occasional logical mystery which is most bothersome.
Here is a quote about the current debate on the fate of Proposition 8 from “The Daily Dish,” Sullivan’s blog, which is offered for your consideration:
Both supporters and opponents have asked for a judicial ruling on whether the initiative can stand. My own view is that it should stand, and the court should decline to reverse it. We lost. They won in a fair fight.
“They won in a fair fight.” Really? One wonders. If the proponents of Prop 8 had not focused on children the final weeks of the campaign, would they have “won?” Had the focus of the campaign been totally about whether or not civil rights, found to be guaranteed under the California state constitution, should be stripped from neighbors, colleagues, and family members, would “they” have won?
Everyone talks about dirty campaigns; all’s fair in love and war—all bromides which paper over the immoral tactics some who debate an issue pursue. It’s one thing when “rogue” partisans run the Willie Horton ads, or the 527s demean Senator Kerry, or when Sarah Palin implies Barack Obama hangs with terrorists, but it’s quite another when a religious-based political group, with religious financial support and pulpit support resorts to lying and using children in the lie.
The proponents of Prop 8 were/are odious liars. Their campaign was not honorable.
The three witches never else spoke so much truth.
How, Andrew, is it that “They won in a fair fight?”
Sphere: Related ContentOne has a deep and abiding admiration, Dear Gentle Reader(s), for persons who have the ability to “play” with words and to see possibilities in the written language.
Today, for example, at the Palm Springs City Hall demonstration against Prop 8, there was a sign which originally read
ONLY
MORONS
HATE
and which had been changed, but a carat and a tilted M to read
ONLY
MOR^M ONS
HATE
Well, you get the picture.
God bless America!
Sphere: Related ContentIt's hard to believe, Dear Gentle Reader(s), that there is so much vitriol being hurled towards Governor Palin lately.
Frankly, it must be said loudly and often that Senator McCain and Senator McCain alone is responsible for Palin's disastrous debut on the national political stage. He hadn't met her, she wasn't properly vetted, she was not ready for the job, and she's been treated shabbily lately. He should be ashamed.
For the senator to choose an unprepared political tyro for the vice presidential nomination solely (sometimes the conventional wisdom is incorrect, but there's virtually no other rationale for her choice) to stir up the Republican base of evangelical Christianists was beneath contempt.
Presidential politics isn't, true, beanbag; but it doesn't have to be shooting a fish in a barrel, either.
Palin has energy which served her well on the stump. If she were more seasoned in policies outside of Alaska and if she were a Democrat, it would be easy to see her in federal politics in the future.
Until then, people should back off. While she bears some responsibility for accepting McCain's offer, it is McCain himself who bears the most responsibility.
Put him in the metaphorical barrel.
It's just logical.
Sphere: Related ContentGeorge Will, Dear Gentle Reader(s), is not one of the most pleasant rightwing pundits for a progressive to read. It's easy to think of him as supercilious.
Today, however, in the pages of Townhall.com, Will presents an interesting article about the state of the Republican Party, circa 2008, which affords progressives an insight and perhaps some understanding of what they've seen coming out of the RP-2008.
"Ah Hah! So that's it. It's a faux Republican Party!"
One agrees. Hie thee thither, DGR(s). You'll be educated and will enjoy "The Downfall of Faux Conservatism."
(Reading the screeching in the comments section is fun, too)
Sphere: Related ContentAtrial fibrillation is a condition which concerns over 2 million Americans directly, and another several million indirectly.
It came to visit last Friday.
There's a fluttering of the heart. It's enough to make one pause; generally it lasts for a few seconds, then the regular heartbeat returns. If it lasts longer, one might seek advice. If nothing else, one gets a couple of nights in a hospital, where there are supportive people taking every effort to make one comfortable.
A-Fib is not to be taken lightly. It could result in severe consequences, such as stroke, if not controlled.
No pain.
With proper medication, no problem.
Obviously.
(whew!)
Sphere: Related ContentDear Gentle Reader(s), occasionally, in order to help keep myself on an even keel, to remind myself of exactly where I stand in the greater picture, whenever a friend or acquaintance complains about this, that, or the other (movie tickets are up to $6.75!), often I will say something like, "At least I don't live in Baghdad and I'm not an Afghani woman," or "Yes. And those whiners in Baghdad! What do they know of suffering?"
Salondotcom offers a new reality slap in the face for all of us: In Mumbai, slum dwellers "live in areas with 100 public toilets for 45,000 residents."
Ponder that, my Dears.
Sphere: Related ContentThis, Dear Gentle Reader(s), from Paul Krugman's column in today's New York Times in which he discusses the financial crisis in which we find ourselves:
Why do we need international cooperation? Because we have a globalized financial system in which a crisis that began with a bubble in Florida condos and California McMansions has caused monetary catastrophe in Iceland. We’re all in
this together, and need a shared solution.
Depending on where one lives, Dear Gentle Reader(s), yesterday/today might one day be considered the day when the world became "one world" after all.
What else could be indicated by a coordinated effort of the major banks in the world to lower interest rates in an effort to solve the current world wide economic problems?
Sphere: Related Content
The procedure was undertaken on February 11, 2008. In three days, the nine month mark will arrive, and all of a sudden it feels like labor pains have begun.
Woke up, on September 26, 2008, with a cramp in the general area of the prostate. Today there are continuing muscle aches near the sphincter. Hmmm.
Waiting it out.
Be of good cheer.
Getting old ain't for sissies. (Thanks, Bette!)
Sphere: Related ContentA hearty declaration, Dear Gentle Reader(s), by Liza Doolittle in My Fair Lady, with which one might be reluctant to argue, except for the delicious moments which occur in the most unexpected places.
For instance, W (if you have to ask "Who?" you haven't been paying attention) once said, "Is our children learning?"
Last Saturday night this memorable line from Tina channeling Sarah on SNL: ""I believe marriage is meant to be a sacred institution between two unwilling teenagers."
True, Sarah didn't say that, but the evidence is strong that the basic idea is true.
Free Bristol!
Free Levi!
Words! You have to love them.
Sphere: Related Content...when the moral and ethical history of the 20th century is written, Dear Gentle Reader(s), there will surely be a paragraph, if not a chapter, on Ford's behavior with regards to the intermittent windshield wiper--at least as is presented in the recent movie Flash of Genius.
Greed will be punished. Unethical behavior will be shown to the world. Scorn will be heaped.
Here's a good mantra: Capitalism--Good; Greed--Bad.
Sphere: Related Content
The New York Times has, of late, done some strange things, i.e., hired Bill Kristol. It does, however, maintain the likes of Frank Rich and Tom Friedman, much to its credit. (Mo Dowd is wonderful to read, but when she gets her Irish up, she borders in irrelevant.)
Today's Friedman column, "Green the Bailout," contains this line, "The American Dream is an aspiration, not an entitlement."
That line is one which should be emblazoned on every baby crib mobile all over the world.
And it should become part of morning prayers/meditation, along with "Capitalism good; greed bad."
Sphere: Related ContentAhh, Dear Gentle Reader(s), language is so much fun. With all the brouhaha going on about the financial negotiations in Washington, it's amusing to take a brief digression into what what some observers, and it turns out some observers have a vested interest, are saying, with some attention given to the diction they are using.
Take, for instance, this little ditty found in a web site identified as IBD Editorials, an organ of Investor's Business Daily:
Hubris and hypocrisy aside, it's important to recognize the legislation for what it is — a rescue, not a bailout, of the financial system.
What's the difference between a rescue and a bailout? Each implies a tough situation from which one is extracted by another.
Perhaps the difference lies in connotations associated with the words. Is it that rescue has a more "elite" connotation than bailout? A more honorable effort? Would one rather be rescued or bailed out?
Who was it making hurling derision at elites lately?
Rescue v Bailout.
Are we using Avon products or Maybelline for this particular pig?
Sphere: Related ContentOf course, Dear Gentle Reader(s), no one knows what the future holds, but one can certainly hope the current "arc" over in Opus is not going to end with the demise of this wonderful comic strip.
A toast to "Bloom County," "Opus," and Berkeley Breathed!
Thank you.
Sphere: Related Content
Far more years ago than I care to say, Dear Gentle Reader(s), an anthropological professor at Teachers College, Columbia University, discussed a certain arrogance which he observed as one society commented on the perceived weaknesses of other societies. The professor's point was that if a society thrives, it works. When societies don't thrive, they disappear.
Here in California a Proposition 8 has been placed on the November 4 ballot. It "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry."
In today's Los Angeles Times, readers are treated to an essay which argues that the proposition ought to be passed in order to protect children.
Here are some quotes from David Blankenhorn's piece for your musings:
1. [Marriage] is primarily a license to have children.
2. Family structure clearly matters for children, and the family structure that helps children the most is a family headed by two biological parents in a low-conflict marriage. (Statement from a 2002 study)
Now, DGR(s), #1 above is an unusual declaration. Given the throw-away kids littering the streets of our major cities, one would hope there would be a "license" needed in order to procreate human beings. Alas, it doesn't seem to be the case.
Very few people would even attempt to argue against #2 above. Of course that would be optimum. The question is how realistic is the optimum?
Blankenhorn admits (reluctantly? but necessarily as a self-proclaimed "liberal Democrat"--we do have a tendency to bare our souls to all of our faults) "Legalized same-sex marriage almost certainly benefits those same-sex couples who choose to marry, as well as the children being raised in those homes." So, the children in same-sex marriage families will "benefit?" What's the problem, then?
The problem is with the language, with the word "marriage," which Blankenhorn feels will be re-defined, and the re-definition will undermine "the birthright" of each child to know his/her biological "maker."
That doesn't seem like a logical problem, given our society. Perhaps the arrogance of the late 20th century's moralists needs to come under scrutiny. Blankenhorn's is not necessarily better than what's being offered by the opponents of Proposition 8.
And besides, Blankenhorn doesn't even live in California. (OK, that's a little petty.) (Another Democratic conscience driven admission)
Sphere: Related Content