Just go. You know you want to, dawg.
Last year about this time, I encountered a "peace" march (whose members were waving the Iraqi flag) and felt compelled to shout out a few supportive slogans:
"Hey, leave him alone! Saddam's not raping my sister!"
"Give the UN 12 more years!"
Now, it seems apparent that at least some of those marchers might have actually thought I was trying to help. Check out the photo choice in this anti-Americanwar article.
(Link via Taranto)
Hey Mitch, why'n't ya check in? Shot In The Dark is, well, dark, and your e-mail's bouncin'. Come on in and say hi!
UPDATE: Well, unbeknownst to me, but knownst to himself I guess, Mitch has changed URL's. Pop on over and leave him a housewarming comment.
Prediction: within 3 months, the Bush administration will feel it necessary to respond to Democrat charges of patronization, if not outright racism, because of their habit of calling NSA Dr. Condoleezza Rice, "Condi."
Or, at least, brush with someone who gets a whole lot of web traffic.
That's me mentioned at the bottom of today's "Best Of The Web Today." I sent the link to the "Eighth Wife Ends Bigamist's Career" story. Taranto didn't use my gag, though: "Shouldn't that be quadruple bigamist?"
Yeah, "Octogamist" is a funny neologism, kinda. I think mine's funnier though.
I also included the gag, "...but he's got 9 mouths to feed!" but that was probably a bit of a reach.
Hello, and welcome to international don't bother to read anything besides this today day!
One thing: if that guy with the sign represents the "fringe" of the antiwar crowd, then why aren't the "normal people" in the crowd kicking his fucking ass?
He ain't the fringe. The people who say he is the fringe are lying.
"I've met with foreign leaders who can't go out and say this publicly, but, boy, they look at you and say, 'You've got to win this. You've got to beat this guy [President Bush]. We need a new policy.' Things like that."
He's backpedalled considerably from this; now it was phone conversations, not meetings; now it was foreign "representatives", maybe not "leaders."
But anyway, since he refuses to name them, we're free to speculate, right?
I'm going to come right out with
The Mullahs of Iran
Kim Jong-Il
for obvious reasons. Anybody got any other ideas?
How long before he claims the defeated PM of Spain was one of them?
Or Eleanor Roosevelt?
UPDATE: Try our poll to the left!
There was a robbery last night of a parking lot attendant at the Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson Airport.
A parking lot manager at Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport was shot, abducted and robbed of the evening's receipts overnight, police said.[...]
When the suspects -- two men and a woman -- got out of the truck and approached his vehicle, Najied, a night manager for the Parking Company of America, hit the gas and rammed the truck, Iosty said.
Najied's airbag deployed, "and the next he knew, the suspects were opening the doors of his vehicle," [Atlanta Police Sgt. Kevin] Iosty said.
Iosty said one of the suspects shot Najied in the left leg.
Well, I heard about it this morning on my way in, and then I noticed in the garbage can next to the elevator in my parking garage, a stack of 50-100 white envelopes with writing on them. They looked like they could have been receipt envelopes, with writing on them like "first shift," "second shift," etc. So I called the police from work and they looked into it. The missing receipt envelopes were manila, not plain white paper.
Dang. I could use a hefty reward right about now.
Mitch links to a great-sounding interview with Mike Nelson of MST3K. I've bought two MST3K DVD's this year, and purposely stuck with classic Joel Hodgson eps, but I might have to check out Mike too.
Oh, anyway, I'm getting my DVD's via Netflix now. I'll be renting a few from there.
Barry Gross shares his deep feelings over the controversy surrounding his newspaper's decision to run a photograph of a suicide's leap from an apartment building:
I have followed, with amusement and bemusement, the industry tongue-clucking and hand-wringing over the New York Post's decision to publish on Page One a photo of Diana Chien's leap from a Manhattan rooftop.
Nothing like a little sophistication and savoir-faire.
I had a breakthrough in my thinking about "Liberal Journalists" over the last couple days. It started with a post on OTLM regarding the "Outraged 9/11 Families" flap (Journalists permitted themselves to be used as a conduit for expressing outrage at Bush by groups that had previously endorsed or even more strongly supported John Kerry. It was a whole thing.) It's probably been stated better before, but here's another way to look at it.
There's no set way to write any story for a journalist. He can take any tack at any moment and satisfy his brief to his employer: to present a story with relevant facts. Similarly, no newspaper can present every story in the world, and no Journalist can present every fact, or even every relevant fact, surrounding an incident. So the newspaper presents what it hopes its readers will be interested in, and to a certain extent, so does the Journalist. But the Journalist has less responsibility directly to the reader, in that he is just one person (with stringers and editors, but work with me here) who is tracking down a story. And how does he go about tracking down the story? By observing, and by asking questions. And how does he know what questions to ask? There's the rub: there's no set list of questions to ask, nor any hard rule about whom to ask them. The "five W's" are a good starting point but are by no means a complete guide. No, it's the Journalist's curiosity that best serves the well-written story. And in the case of the story you're referring to, and in the case of the "outraged 9/11 families" story, the possibility of getting outside information on the people who adhere to his worldview just naturally doesn't ping his curiosity meter.
Does the Journalist have a responsibility to reach outside his normal curiosity zone? I think so, but really, how can he? Bloggers caught the manufactured "outraged 9/11 families" because they were curious and, yes, had an axe to grind. Presented with the commercials, how would a Journalist who supports W in his heart have approached the issue of the 9/11 images? Who would he have called for comment?
Journalists need to realize that when they're reflexively challenging some position or following up on someone's statement, it's probably because they're predisposed to disagree with that position. Then they need to figure out how to challenge positions they agree with. Or, alternatively, they need to drop the pretense of impartiality. They're only human. They need to stop pretending to us that they're something wholly other.
You say you're in a training class and it's just droning on and on?
You say you've been in training all week and this afternoon seems to be taking as long as the rest of the class put together?
Is that what's bothering you, bucky?
Here, maybe this will help.
I don't necessarily believe that
[...W]hen yet another insufferable penseur -- first Chirac, then de Villepin, now the editor of Le Monde -- starts lecturing Americans on how they ought to conduct themselves in the world, the rules of decorum are suspended.
but it certainly is fun that Charles Krauthammer believes it:
We [the french] loved you on Sept. 11 means: We like Americans when they are victims, on their knees and bleeding. We just don't like it when they get off the floor -- without checking with us first.Colombani glories in Europe's post-Sept. 11 ``solidarity'' with America: ``Let us remember here the involvement of French and German soldiers, among other European nationalities, in the operations launched in Afghanistan to ... free the Afghans.''
Come again? The French arrived in Mazar-e Sharif after it fell -- or as military analyst Jay Leno put it, ``to serve as advisers to the Taliban on how to surrender properly.''
You have to read the whole thing just to enjoy the heights of outrage the man reaches. He's right, of course, but I don't think my blood pressure could take being quite so right.
I usually listen to Sean Hannity at the start of my commute in order to get traffic & weather on the way home. Then I keep him on until he embarrasses himself, or worse, makes even me cringe with his frequently wrongfooted take on important issues. He's usually right, but he's frequently right for the wrong reasons and anybody who's ever argued with me knows that I'll jump on that every time even when I'm making enemies left & right.
But yesterday evening he had George Stephanopolous on and nailed him to the wall so subtly and effectively that I almost wonder if it was on purpose. I wish I had a transcript; maybe one will appear. What follows is all paraphrase.
Hannity was interviewing Stephanopolous about the campaign so far and he started by asking about the most effective way for Kerry to handle the charge of flip-flopping. Stephanopolous answered smoothly and persuasively, oh, just point out that if they think he's on the right side now, don't worry about the flip-flop because it's just part of the process of arriving at the right answer, etc. etc.
Then Hannity asked what Bush should do to counter some Kerry charge or other.
Stephanopolous answered, very quickly, that it wasn't his job to...
Hannity interrupted him, OK, I know, I know. Now, how should Kerry deal with Bush's painting him as a liberal?
Stephanopolous: Oh, that's easy. (Long answer, something about how Liberal isn't a bad word if you own the positions etc. etc.)
Hannity: Thanks. The Dems have been swinging at Bush for months now. How should he enter the fight without drawing charges of negativism?
Stephanopolous: I'm not going to get into...
Hannity: OK, thanks.
This went on until Stephanopolous had to leave. It was really hilarious.
Now, I know that Stephanopolous is a commentator and therefore need not pretend to any great even-handedness. But I suspect he would nevertheless claim not to be biased in his capacity as anchor of a weekly news program. That "It's not my job" and "I'm not going to get into" when the question was about strategies to help Bush, compared with the long-winded answers for how Kerry could deal with problems, was just priceless.
Semi-Update:
I just posted this on the "contact the show" form at Hannity.com:
I'm dying to know if your subtle skewering of George Stephanopolous was done on purpose on yesterday's show. You were talking with him about the campaign and you asked him about how Kerry should deal with charges of flip-flopping; George responded with a smooth and silky and obviously well-prepared answer. Then you asked how Bush should respond to some charge of Kerry's. George immediately responded, "Oh, it's not my job to..."
You interrupted (politely) with another question about how Kerry should respond to another Bush attack. And George was again perfectly willing to advise the Kerry campaign.
Then you asked another question about how Bush should handle some aspect of his campaign, and George again begged off!
His bias couldn't have been clearer if he'd had it tattooed on his forehead. Bravo, Sean! You're a great American.
If you have a minute, please leave a commenton my weblog at http://www.bovious.com/archives/main/000245.html to let me know if you did that on purpose. Forgive the criticisms of you in the weblog post, for they are made by one who has only your best interests and those of the country at heart.
All the best,
Brian Jones
Yes, sycophantic, I know. Let's see what ol' Sean has to say.
I strongly suggest you make The Urban Farmhouse a part of your blog-reading. I know I will. My old friends Joe & Kate are goin' at it hammer & tongs over there. They are witty and bright people who I've been really privileged to know since we met via the newsgroup rec.sports.golf.
Check 'em out!
Now that I know Kate's into it, though, I'm going to now get my feelings hurt that she hasn't posted to my comments. :( :( :(
Now, I've seen plenty of stupid bumper stickers. Some of them even supporting ideas I believe in, I hasten to add. For instance, although I believe the Darwin Fish is destructive to atheist-Christian relations, I think the "Truth Fish Eating The Darwin Fish" is just dumb. And there's probably a "Calvin Pissing on Osama" bumper sticker somewhere which I will stipulate is stupid even before I've even seen it.
However, a Pro-Choice bumper sticker I saw yesterday has to take the cake. Not because it's Pro-Choice; hey, if you don't think it's murder, I guess abortion is just like getting a hangnail fixed. (I've actually seen that lovely sentiment from a Pro-Choicer.)
But if you're trying to stop and make people think about the wonderful benefits of abortion, you probably could do so much better than with a bumper sticker reading:
Guns don't kill people. Abortion protestors do.
Huh?
OK, sure, there have been some widely-publicized cases of anti-abortionists engaging in murder, and we all know that's horrible and even a tad ironic. But still, it's a small number compared to thousands and thousands who abhor the murder of millions of innocent babies and take it to the streets.
But, back to the bumper sticker. I mean, it kind of leaves one wide open, doesn't it? If that's not the stupidest Pro-Choice-supporting sentiment ever presented, I'd like to know what is.
I probably need to go to Cafe Press and get some bumper stickers printedup and on sale:
Guns don't kill people. Abortionists do.
I gave my son a Sacagawea at the restaurant last night to change for gumballs, and then he insisted that his allowance be paid in them! Since I was behind on his allowance anyway, it was kind of fun to whip out four of them to catch him up. Also I caught my daughter up with two.
They promptly dropped them in the back seat of the car.
I think I'll go hug my daughter extra-good tonight.
And my son, too, for good measure.
You think when you lose your child that you'll dream about her all the time. I've only dreamt of Caroline a handful of times in the four years since she died. I dreamt about her this morning, on her birthday. We were at the end of her days again, the time when she couldn't move and even her mouth was clamped shut because of the tumor. The doctors wanted us to let her starve to death. Their children weren't hungry, so far as I know.In those last weeks I would hold her in my lap, with a roll of paper towels and a couple of cans of vitamin drink on the bedside table, and I would slowly dribble the drink between her clenched teeth, and then wipe the spill from her face. It took about four or five hours a day to feed her, because only a few drops at a time would go in.
There I was in that place again, only something changed in the middle of it, and Caroline was gone, and it was me being fed through a mouth that refused to open. In my dream I knew it was God holding me and doing the feeding, though now I don't know how I knew this.
Tony Woodlief's daughter Caroline would have turned 8 yesterday. I have never read or imagined anything as immediate and heartbreaking as Tony's writings on his daughter. They always leave me speechless and shaken. Yet he doesn't leave me feeling guilty for enjoying my own, healthy children. I don't know how that happens...not that I'm inclined to feel guilty, but that he shows such raw agony and yet invites the reader into it, rather than pushing you away from it.
Just read it.
Treacher's on the trail of a gag. Won't you help? I think he's barking up the wrong tree, myself.
No, that wasn't a pun.
Back when I announced the Sacagawea Blogger Challenge, I probably should have mentioned that I only rarely carry cash around with me.
So it's taken me this long to spend any. Yes, I've spent some cash over the course of the year and wished I had some of the golden beauties to distribute, but that was not to be.
That said, my credit union had some this week and I spent three of them at Wendy's last night. Woo-hoo! Only 97 more to go!
My blogroll is hopelessly dinky and messy. However, I had to add "Oh, THAT Liberal Media" the instant I discovered it via Instapundit. Go, read. Lots of fun stuff. The entry about Ruth Bader Ginsburg is alone worth the blogroll entry.
Does the 2nd Amendment protect our right to own disposable cameras? Maybe it should.
Three armed robbers playfully took snapshots of themselves while driving a stolen SUV. But after fooling around, they unwittingly left the disposable camera in the vehicle, giving police the ammunition they needed to bring the trio to justice.
I'm not sure "unwittingly" is exactly the choice of words here, but 't'will do, 't'will do.
My hosting service is having difficulties. So if Boviosity! won't load for you, that's probably why. I haven't disappeared.
I think I've found my whiskey.
Jack Daniels Black is simply the best thing in my bar right now. Pour over ice, a small splash of water to dispel the vapours, and I'm good.
I started seriously drinking whiskey a year or so ago in order to be able to tell the differences in the various types. Tennessee? Bourbon? Scotch? Irish?
I really like my Bushmill's, too, but it's kind of expensive. I'll definitely keep buying it though.
The also-rans:
Dewars Scotch: I like it, but not enough to buy regularly. Scotch is definitely an aquired taste, and I will say I've aquired it to the extent that I can drink it without complaint. I'll probably keep a bottle around.
Jim Beam: I figured out what bothers me about it. It's got a cloying peppery aftertaste that makes it suitable for use only as a mixer. I haven't had any Maker's Mark for awhile - I really really liked it when I had it. But now that I've honed my taste a little, I think I'll try it again and see if that's a feature of Bourbon in general or just Jim Beam.
Update 13:58
I just realized, the phrase I was looking for to describe the Jim Beam is "green-woody." Makes sense since Bourbon is kept in wine barrels, right?
A few nights ago, I dreamed that I was at a party of college kids, and entertainment and sports figures. I don't remember who any of them were. I was definitely not "one of them" insofar as being a star or an athlete or a student.
Then, I noticed a cassette of "The Dentist's Plan," an opera I'd written 10 years earlier, was on the host's shelf. I wondered if the host, a popular college professor, knew that the creator of this work was at his party, so I sought him out to tell him who I was. The work had never made it onto CD, so the fact that the cassette was so prominently displayed meant that he must really like it.
I found him holding court in his bedroom. He looked a lot like Jesus, but with a cold and calculating look in his eye: what have you to offer me, I'll believe it when I see it, that kind of thing.
A lot of my dreams involve encounters with God, I think. Lately, my Aunt Pearl, Rick Wakeman, and others have taken that place in my dreams. More later. I might use the extended entry to opine on my interpretation. You're welcome to use the comments to insert your own interpretations, although my interpretations of my dreams almost never match others'.
Sonny Lied!
Goddamn crypto-racist redneck peckerwoods cried!
I've been having some amazing dreams lately. I am very interested in the interpretation of dreams because I believe they tell us things about ourselves we might never know otherwise - fears, aspirations, motivations, and many other things. I'm not one of those who believes dreams are prophetic, except insofar as they reveal your attitudes to upcoming events.
This is my blog, obviously, and so I can put my dreams up here if I want. But I don't want to drive away my few readers or any new readers who show up. I'm going to make a few "Dream Journal" entries here and see how they go over. If they are unpopular or if I feel I'm revealing too much personal stuff, though, I might put it on a separate dream blog.
From an e-mail I received today on the Atlanta Theatre Mailing List:
TONIGHT, and tonight only, come see preview night Pride's Crossing at Neighborhood Playhouse for only $5.In celebration of Women's History Month
URT! Stopped reading right there. Sorry. Anybody got any other eye-brakes?
From today's AJC Vent:
I love it when somebody says they've looked all over town for an item and Jill Sabulis shoots back that she found it at Kroger.
Oops. I should have said Sabine Morrow. Sorry, Sabine.