happy day, we got the keys to the new house
anyway, WHOOOOOHOOOO. i picked up the keys to our new house today. we start moving boxes and stuff thataway starting in the morning. i am so pumped. took a few pictures
a quiet corner on the info superhighway for the rantings and ruminations of a geezer bemused by modern society. political correctness is left at the curb. "An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life. Robert A. Heinlein "
McCormack says that Rain's erratic behavior would also come to include excessive politeness and deference.
"Everytime I tried to talk to him it was 'yes Momma,' and 'no Momma,' when he knows damn well my name is Ellen," she says, anger rising in her voice. "It was like I didn't even know him anymore."
McCormack tried an intervention with friends from the Anti-war community, but to no avail. In October, Bobby Ray packed up his Monte Carlo and left for basic training at Camp Pendleton.
"I have no son," she says in a barely audible whisper.
The local news was worse, since nothing much happens in Minneapolis. At least in DC you got the full measure of horror every day. (I once considered patenting a suit that contained fine white powder in its seams so you could leave your own chalk outline when you fell. Saved time for all concerned.) So I got out of the habit, and never missed it.
Jacques Chirac, the president of France, missed another good opportunity to shut up, the Times of London reports:
Chirac dealt a blow to Tony Blair's attempt to heal the wounds between the US and Europe last night by saying that the Prime Minister had won nothing for supporting the war against Iraq. . . .
M Chirac, speaking to British journalists, including The Times, soon after General Powell's announcement, revealed that he had urged Mr Blair to demand the relaunch of the Middle East peace process in return for backing the war.
"Well, Britain gave its support but I did not see anything in return. I'm not sure it is in the nature of our American friends at the moment to return favours systematically."
Unlike the French, who of course got loads of money in exchange for supporting Saddam Hussein. Whereas Chirac appears to see other countries only in terms of what they can do for him, Blair in his speech stressed common values:
I know one thing. If we were under direct threat, America would be our ally. I know that its people enjoy, as we have seen, a vibrant competitive democracy; and that in America, Hispanics, blacks, Asians and former Europeans live together, worship in their different ways and can rise from the bottom to the top in a manner we could do well to emulate. I didn't agree with Michael Moore's film. But in America he was able to make it and be praised for it. This is called freedom.
Chirac no doubt would respond that the French are free to praise Michael Moore too. Ah well, c'est la vie. We'd just like to point out these numbers (hat tip: blogger Patrick Ruffini):
Bush voters 60,515,255
Total population of France 59,900,268
Oh well, at least Frenchmen (and -women and -children) outnumber Kerry voters by a couple of million or so.
National Journal's Charlie Cook argues that the 2004 election was far from "transformative" and hints that John Kerry might even have won if only he'd been someone else:
I still question whether Kerry got any votes that just about any other Democrat challenging Bush under these circumstances wouldn't have also gotten. Some of his defeated rivals for the Democratic nomination might have done a better job of communicating a compelling economic message in Ohio and Iowa.
Of course, if they'd done a better job of communicating a compelling economic message in Iowa, Kerry might not have won the Iowa caucuses! Anyway, didn't the Democrats overwhelmingly vote for Kerry because he was "electable"? We suspect the truth is closer to what Winston Churchill said about democracy: Kerry was the worst available candidate--except for all the others.
Meanwhile, the American Civil Liberties Union announces that it has intimidated the Pentagon into agreeing "to end direct sponsorship of hundreds of Boy Scout units, which require members to swear religious oaths, on military facilities across the United States and overseas."
The ACLU press release quotes the group's Adam Schwartz: "If our Constitution's promise of religious liberty is to be a reality, the government should not be administering religious oaths or discriminating based upon religious beliefs." But of course, the government was doing no such thing; the Boy Scouts are a private group. If you don't like what they stand for, don't join them.
The ACLU used to be so committed to free expression that it would even represent Nazis and Klansmen seeking to express their views. But apparently they draw the line at the Boy Scouts.
Mr. Annan then flew to Baghdad for a private powwow with Saddam and returned to declare that this was a man he could do business with. The weapons inspectors returned to Iraq for a short spell, but by the end of 1998, Saddam had evicted them for the next four years. Mr. Annan, however, went right on doing business. And big business it was, however humanitarian in name. Under the Oil for Food deal, Mr. Annan's Secretariat pulled in a 2.2% commission on Saddam's oil sales, totaling a whopping $1.4 billion over the life of the program, to cover the costs of supervising Saddam. Yet somehow the Secretariat never found the funding to fully meter oil shipments, ensure full inspections of all goods entering Iraq, or catch the pricing scams that by the new estimates of Senate investigators let Saddam rake in $4.4 billion in kickbacks on relief contracts.from a WSJ editorial can shed some light.
I came upon your site while searching for a roasted pumpkin seeds recipe a few weeks ago.
I enjoy your site :) I am also looking forward to scrolling through the carnival of recipes when I have time. I am a stay at home Mom, married for 12 years, who enjoys creating stained glass art as my most passionate hobby.
Like you, my husband works in the Nuclear industry (in NC). He also served in the Navy on an aircraft carrier for 6 years.
I get so tired of the stereo type that men who own firearms are a bunch of red neck, beer drinkin, wife beating, mobile home residing, bbq junkies. It is refreshing to come to this site where people can see that there are men out there who are responsible and loving husbands and fathers who pass on their tradition and love of hunting and to their children and grandchildren. They are not all a bunch of uneducated hicks with an 8th grade education ;) In fact, I had my first experience skeet shooting with my husband a few weeks ago. Don't ask how it went....my whole body ached for days! LOL
Also refreshing to me is not having to weed through a bunch of political correctness. I have two children in elementary school and I volunteer much of my time being involved in their education. It astonishes me how political correctness has gotten out of hand. Especially when myself and my husband who are trying to raise two boys to grow up to be strong and moral men who say "sir" and Maam" and (gasp) open doors for ladies. Please allow me to give you an example:
Last year in my son's 2nd grade class I noticed after several weeks that one little girl would not face the flag during the pledge of allegiance. I wasn't really sure if she was just day dreaming or doing it on purpose. I asked the teacher (who had been teaching for 42 years) about it. Basically, because of this child's religious beliefs, she is not allowed to pledge allegiance to the American Flag. The teacher also had a valid point when she told me that there are many parents who will not allow their children to participate in one of our most basic freedoms and will not stand with the very country that supports them through programs like welfare, affirmative action and many others that my husbands hard earned money supports. I am all for religious freedom, but it bothers me that the very country that ALLOWS them religious freedom is not good enough in their eyes to warrant respect. We have children in our schools who are violent, verbally and physically abusive to the staff and teachers and have parents who do nothing but perpetuate these actions by their being poor role models and just plain indifferent. Yet, the government ties the schools' hands in dealing with it. These children disrupt the class room daily and there isn't a damn thing schools can do about it except put up with it. Don't get me wrong, I understand that these children are caught in the middle and most are crying out desperately for help but it seems that there must be some solution out there somewhere that can remove the child from disrupting classrooms, yet a place for them to be educated in a setting where people who are educated in dealing with kids such as these can help them. Having children who are teachers, I am certain you hear from them often about these things.
Ok, I am done on my soapbox. Sorry, I tend to babble. I am not a very political person but I just wanted you to know that finding your site was to me, a breath of fresh air. After the last several months of listening to all of the crap being dished out from people who want to give health care and driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, spend more tax payers' dollars to support people who refuse to get up off their ass and get a JOB because they are too busy popping out illegitimate children I really needed an outlet. Obviously, emailing you was it.
Fed up Mom in North Carolina
Typical response from a typical ignorant idiot.
Why don't I leave? Because this is the US and I have the right to my
opinion as you do yours. If you believe that any dissent is
would suggest that you, sir, are the antithesis of what it is to be an
American. It is what our country was founded upon. If you want opinions
be uniform, perhaps it is you who should leave. Try Saudi Arabia you
I don't mind you using my comments, however it does go against the typical grain of conduct to use someone's email address on a blog without their
permission. I would humbly request you to remove it.
You seem like a rather intelligent individual, yet it also seems that you gather your sources from viewpoints that mirror yours. Therein lies the problem. I enjoy reading your blog, simply because I don't agree with it. Unlike many of my liberal compatriots I was not unaware what the heartland of America thinks or believes for I live in it. I was brought up in a evangelical home (at least partly) and I actually do subscribe to the Spectator and the Weekly Standard. I listen to Rush, Hannity, et al.
Because I accuse middle America of putting its head in the collective sand.
Not being challenged on their views. Not having to defend their position. It becomes quite clear when your arguments don't hold up when you have to intelligently defend them. I find it rather amusing to find the recent trend among conservatives as echoing the very words that Rush coined many years ago: conservatives are intellectually bankrupt. If memory serves me correct he based that on the idea that liberals always spoke in terms of "I feel, etc." When you listen to the recent polls, evidently conservatives are just as lilly livered as liberals as they "felt" that George W. Bush could better protect them.
There a lot of people out there that consider themselves progressive libertarians and you should perhaps think about that. I think you should at least try to engage in dialog and discourse from a perspective of learning instead of merely trying to pound your oft-used, tired rhetoric down everyone's throat. I have seen glimpse of your independent streak at times on your blog.
It used to be that it was only liberals who bought into the party-line hook, line and sinker. Now, the tables have turned and it is the right wing with a singular and myopic viewpoint, intolerant and incapable of dissent.
There are many within the Republican party who fear that this could lead to a fundamental implosion. I don't share that thought (however good it is.)
However, if they feel disaffected, despite their objections, they will jump ship. Barry Goldwater must be turning over in his grave!
Have a good one Hal.
I do hope we could establish some guest column relationship. I would have no problem with that. I make it a point to tell people to read all sources and expose yourselves to differing views- we all may be surprised to find that there are issues we have a common ground on.
Jon Friedman, a commentator for CBS MarketWatch, is still trying to figure out what happened:
The Bush political team intuitively understood the tone of the U.S. voters much better than the media did. To be honest, I still don't quite understand how certified media junkies like me could have been so wrong.
I read the New York Times and the New Yorker religiously. I watch CNN and the networks' evening news programs as well as the gabfests on Sunday mornings, too.
Vote or Die
"Distraught over the re-election of President George W. Bush, a Georgia man traveled to New York City, went to Ground Zero and killed himself with a shotgun blast," reports Long Island's Newsday. Relatives of the dead man, Andrew Veal, "said Veal, a registered Democrat, was despondent over Bush's defeat of Sen. John Kerry."
Newsday visits Ground Zero and interviews visitors about their reaction:
Frank Franca, an East Village artist and registered Democrat, suggested the suicide was symbolic.
"I'm very moved by it," he said. "Obviously, this person was devastated. I can see why he would come here."
Franca's friend, Jeffim Kuznetsov, a 25-year-old student from Russia who lives in Atlanta, said the suicide is evidence of how deeply many Americans were affected by Kerry's defeat.
"It's a national tragedy," he said. "This election is devastating to all who believe in democracy."
Veal obviously had psychiatric problems, but these guys are just plain sick.