The best prediction I've heard

'In 2004, more dumb things will be said by more educated people about the trial of Saddam Hussein than all dumb things about all other major subjects combined.'
-Jonah Goldberg

Calling it like you see it.

Instapundit has some words on the Palestinians.

Bizarro Howard

Julian Sanchez notes something I've been talking about: isn't it weird that Howard Dean has said that he is going to play up his religion in the South? Part of political strategy is that you don't tell people what you're going to do, because then it comes off as, well, fake. I know Dean thinks that his straight talking is a plus, but ultimately it shows that he really thinks Southerners are stupid. Would he say 'I'm going to play up my signing the Civil Unions bill to the gay crowd' or 'I'm going to go out of my way to be nice to Sharpton and Moseley-Braun when I know black people are watching'?

Random Morning Blogsurfing

The Democrats need a Reagan says Colby Cosh.

Vodkapundit confirms that 2003 did indeed happen.

The Anti-idiotarian Rottweiler does not taking baby killing lightly.

Rachel Lucas has a haiku about Hillary.

Rightwing News has an excellent list of the 10 Worst Quotes From The Democratic Underground For 2003. Classic.

Question for DC based readers

Does someone living in Georgetown but working in Alexandria absolutely need a car? What is public transportation like between these two areas?

Tell me again how they wouldn't work together

Al Qaeda videos found in Iraq weapons raid

Via Free Republic.

The Jaime Sneider Fan Club (you will someday be a member)

A few years ago, I went to a panel about Columbia University's obscene sexual harassment policy. One of the panelists was this young, beautiful, brilliant guy who has hilarious and sharp. His name was Jaime Sneider. His introduction noted that he had written for a million different places, among them The New York Times, New York Daily News, New York Post, Reason and National Review, and most of these were when he wasn't old enough to drink yet. Look up his name on google and you get about 300 hits. I dropped him an email about how much I enjoyed his talk and we began an email exchange. That summer he interned at National Review (his Condit-watch pieces had me giggling at my desk) I harassed him on Instant Messenger until he became my friend. He met me for lunch at my then-office at the top of the Chrysler Building. We talked about movies (a film buff, he writes the best reviews for the quirkiest movies) and I tried not to be such a fan. Tried.

Anyway, its years later and we are friends. He's already done amazing things (I don't want to say 'for someone his age' because he's done amazing things for someone of any age), among them working as a speechwriter for California gubernatorial candidate Bill Simon, and I expect he'll continue to do so. He's had a few sites which he promises to update, his own site, a site dedicated to tracking idiotic celebrity comments and a group blog that is, unfortunately, infrequently updated. I was just honored with reading a chapter of a book he is writing. I hardly ever make predictions, particularly in public, but I want to make one now: Jaime is someone to watch, he will do incredible things.

Loving Bush

I know I'm a few years late on this, but, last night, Peter, Doug, Ari, Oschisms and I sat on my couch and watched 'Journeys With George', Alexandra Pelosi's documentary about George W. Bush's campaign in 2000.

I was in no rush to see the movie when it was playing, mostly because the reviews all mentioned how Bush appears to be a 'frat boy' and how much Pelosi despises her ex-subject. Pelosi is, unfortunately (and despite Oschism's protests to the contrary), an ass. Every interview I've read with her (example here) has her tearing into Bush and generally acting like a jerk. It seems like she wanted to hate Bush, and is able to do so more successfully now that she isn't around him all day, but that her film didn't get that point across as well as she would've wished. The movie definitely tries to show Bush in a bad light but is ultimately unsuccessful. He comes off as so down to earth, funny, real, approachable, honest.

There was some degree of boozing going on while we watched the film so we didn't really discuss if that was the consensus agreement. I would love to hear from the two Democrats and one Independent in the room, or others who have seen it, if they got a different impression of Bush off the movie. My thesis for this post is: anyone who sees this movie will find it impossible to hate George W. Bush, no matter how intense their current anger and hatred. Agree/Disgree?

Those evil Israelis strike again

My friend, and sometimes Spot On commenter, SMFA sent me an article a few weeks ago about Egyptian foreign minister going to Al Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem to worship and getting beat up by some Palestinians. Then, I didn't hear about it again. Jay Nordlinger has more on this story:

A remarkable event occurred, of which we should all take note. In Jerusalem, the Egyptian foreign minister went to Al Aqsa mosque to worship. He was attacked by Palestinians . . . and had to be rescued by the Israeli police. There is so much in this story — so much that is illustrative — the mind reels.

This little episode provides so much to ponder — about intra-Arab relations, about international relations, and about the nature of Israel — it could last you for weeks.

Quote Of The Day

'If US aid to Iran comes as a surprise to anyone, then they don’t understand the US.'
-James Lileks

UN stupidity

From the Christmas issue of the Economist:

'In Liberia, a UN scheme to disarm gunmen by paying them for their weapons was forced to halt, at least temporarily, when too many showed up and demanded cash for their weapons. Reports from neighbouring Sierra Leone suggested that guns were being smuggled into Liberia to take advantage of the scheme.'

And this is the all-knowing, 'legitimate' world body to whom Europe is clamoring for us to hand over Afghanistan and Iraq. The UN just doesn't get the gangster mentality, despite the fact that so many of its members states have it. The 12 year old me would've been able to tell you that if you pay people for something, they'll find a way to get more of it to sell to you. Maybe Brooklyn needs its own seat at the UN, because something I learned quite early in life is that demand will always breed supply and that, shockingly, people will do whatever it takes to meet that demand and make money. This is a great reason why I hate the fact that any of my tax dollars go to this inept, failure of an organization.

Bush for blogs?

Instapundit links to Colby Cosh blogging about the continuing struggle journalists are having with Bush's comment that he doesn't read the newspaper. Colby Cosh wonders how many Fortune 500 CEOs read the newspaper and thinks the number isn't over 200. Instapundit asks 'I wonder how many read blogs?'

If you think about it, Bush has a human blog, so to speak. Blogs take the most interesting and important stories of the day and dissect them, provide a wide range of opinions on them, allow you read the stories for yourself and, usually, allow you to leave your own comments on said news. Bush has a team of people who provide him with news stories, then provide their opinion on these stories, he can read the stories himself and define his own opinion based on all these things. It helps that he has some of the most brilliant people in the world 'blogging' just for him.

Why I love Ann Coulter

I have frequently said that I am not an Ann Coulter fan. Her writing doesn't appeal to me and I just don't get as mad as she does. But, on tv, she is the best. I've chosen to watch her over Peggy Noonan, the high preistess of conservative writing, because Ann just rocks on the screen. I start being really thankful that she's on the same side as I am. I guess I'm not the only one who thinks so. Scared much, liberals?

Via The Corner.

Eminem is a Republican, exhibit A

Lyrics from 'Love Me' by Eminem:

There's a certain mystique when I speak,
that you notice that it's sorta unique,
cause you know it's me, my poetry's deep,
and I'm still matic the way I flow to this beat,
you can't sit still, it's like tryin to smoke crack
and go to sleep, I'm strapped,
just knowing any minute I could snap,
I'm the equivalent of what would happen if Bush rapped,
I bully these rappers so bad lyrically,
it ain't even funny, I ain't even hungry,
it ain't even money, you can't pay me enough
for you to play me, it's cockamamie.

Queen Elizabeth not really royalty?

Buzzmachine feels sorry for her.

Authoritarianism hits home

Where are the same people who protest the PATRIOT Act not up in arms about stuff like this?

The county just south of my hometown will shortly be following New York's example and instituting a smoking ban in all "bars, restaurants, bowling alleys, minicasinos, hotels and most other nontribal businesses in Pierce County," effectively driving all smoking business to the non-taxed entities. Not only does this discriminate against small business in Washington state (tribal entities get all kinds of breaks around here), it actually lowers the county's direct and indirect benefits from taxing tobacco, and by extension its ability to even enforce health regulations.

Today's New York Times article argues that not all businesses have been hurt by the ban on smoking, the kind of evidence that is used to support this legislation in many cities: "Many bar owners and managers say the smoking ban has hurt business, eroding profits and, in some cases, forcing them to cut back hours or lay off workers. Others say they have seen virtually no effect." This should be obvious. Businesses that don't have an environment or pre-existing policy that appeals to smokers won't have a shift in clientele, like the handful of smoke-free bars I live nearby that draw crowds for that very reason. But those who do, will. Our humble Tacoma News Tribune gives a good example.

Nearly 730 businesses in Pierce County licensed to serve food or alcohol on the premises are already voluntarily smoke-free. All of the owners of smoking establishments questioned for this story said they allow smoking because a majority of their customers and employees smoke.

"It's a free market," said Johnson. "And if 85 percent of my customers didn't smoke, I wouldn't allow smoking."

In New York, the ban is also causing problems. Excerpts, with interjections:

Some restaurants and bars say that business is fine — even thriving, as the economy improves — particularly in places where food is a main draw. Further, a vast majority of New Yorkers have said in recent polls that they are happy with the new law. One survey shows that many regular restaurantgoers see a smoke-free environment as an attraction. [Oh, the things the free market could do for them!]

"It's harder to keep track of everybody going in and out," said Chuck Zeilfelder, a bartender at Bourbon Street in Bayside, Queens, who opposes the ban. "It's common for people to leave money on the bar, and that becomes an issue — how much they left. Also, people leave their drinks on the bar and go out. The drinks get thrown out, and then you have to buy them another round on the house."

I have some sympathy for the bar and restaurant workers who supposedly are suffering from the consequences of secondhand smoke (scientifically questionable). But they've chosen their jobs just like miners and construction workers and diplomats on danger pay. We should be trying to make the world safer -- but ultimately you are responsible for your own health, from not eating every holiday cookie in sight to not picking a job where you think you'll be in danger. People should be allowed to weigh the costs and make their own decisions.

If the proud citizens of New York, New York and Tacoma, Washington don't want to smoke or work or hang out in smoking environments, they've got that choice, and capitalism will happily make a way for them -- as it already has. But this legislation is only destructive, not just to businesses, but to people's freedoms and choices. So long as in this country we can smoke and eat ice cream and have office jobs that expand our asses, the government should let us decide for ourselves whether to do so, and the free market will make room for us. By taking away our economic choices, the law is taking away our political freedoms as well. And furthermore, it is doing so unnecessarily, rushing to control a situation that the market is taking care of just as well on its own.

Who's the snotty world leader now?

UPDATE: This is what I get for waiting until I'm home to post and not reading Kashei's 5 o'clock entry. Nonetheless, enjoy the analysis. Sorry K! :)

After all the talk of George Bush "alienating our allies" and the outcry at US rejection of European control over its defenses, what will the friendship-minded Democratic presidential candidates say to this?

The earthquake, which Iranian agencies measured at 6.3 and American agencies at 6.7, rocked Bam, 610 miles southeast of the capital, Tehran, at 5:28 a.m. Friday.

Government spokesmen said that foreign aid workers would not need entry visas and that aid would be welcome from everywhere but Israel.

Look, I see the reasoning. Iran believes that Israel is a rogue nation. Wrong, but fair enough -- Iran is itself a sovereign nation and has the right to make compromises for its own security. If it believes Israeli aid would bring with it greater threats, that's its business, and the international community could object if it wanted to.

But right or wrong, Iran is snubbing the greatest power in its region -- for free, no-strings-attached emergency aid, nonetheless. Will those who whine that President Bush's decision to maintain sovereignty over US foreign affairs be as upset about this same violation in principle by Iran?

No. Kerry, Dean, We'll-Ask-You-First Wesley and the rest of the left will only praise this Irani decision (if it's mentioned at all), because "diplomacy" is not and has never been the issue. The issue is ideology, and Israel being an ally of the US, the anti-Americans will see no problem with this dismissal of potential Israeli goodwill, just as they saw no reason not to give the most anti-American nation in history complete control over our international affairs.

Just a reminder

From Jonah Goldberg:

Gadhafi told Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi last fall, "I will do whatever the Americans want, because I saw what happened in Iraq, and I was afraid." That was before he saw Saddam's tonsils on CNN.

Quote of the Day:

“We greatly welcome any assistance from the United States. We welcome assistance from all countries except Israel.”
-Akbar Alavi, the governor of Kerman, Iran said in regards to offers of help.

Via Doug.

How is this a top headline?

Singer David Byrne makes PowerPoint art

Bloggers gone wild

What happens when you hang out until 3am with Doug, Ari, Oschisms and several other blogless, but lovely, people on a Friday night? You wake up at 1:30pm and can't form sentences for several hours after that.

Two things

1. Yes, I really have been listening to Leonard Cohen's Greatest Hits for about 4 days straight now. Some people are starting to get really annoyed.

2. Have you been checking out Peter's sporadically updated, and not at all aptly named, 'Daily Wire' site? You should.

Dealing with one of two "women's" issues

I'm sorry to have two posts in a row that mention abortion, but I found this site that recounts stories of women who are pro-life but have had abortions. The stories sound sort of fake to me, I could be completely wrong but they just seem like demonization of pro-lifers rather than real life stories. I'm pro-choice, as I think many of you know, but I find the hardcore pro-life position ('it's a life and it's wrong to take an innocent life') to be much more compelling than the hardcore pro-choice one ('it's a woman's right to chooooooose').

Assuming the stories are true, I find this one really odd:

"I had a 37 year old woman just yesterday who was 13 weeks. She said she and her husband had been discussing this pregnancy for 2-3 months. She was strongly opposed to abortion, 'but my husband is forcing me to do it.' Naturally, I told her that no one could force her into an abortion, and that she had to choose whether the pregnancy or her husband were more important. I told her I only wanted what was best for her, and I would not do the abortion unless she agreed that it was in her best interest. Once she was faced with actually having to voice her own choice, she said 'Well, I made the appointment and I came here, so go ahead and do it. It's what's best.' At last I think she came to grips with the fact that it really was her decision after all." (Physician, Nevada)

This woman tells the doctor that she doesn't want an abortion and that her husband is forcing her into it. Did she really 'come to grips with the fact that it was her decision after all' when her doctor told her she had a 'choice'? Or, did she ultimately do exactly what the doctor said she should: chose which was more important to her, her husband or her baby? Didn't the doctor realize this? How is this an example of a pro-lifer seeing the light?

Via Pharyngula, a lefty science site that I surfed onto via Clarified.

Feminism today

Surfing by the NOW website, I saw a link to a site that was going to tell me the 'Truth about George' (presumably, Bush). I clicked the link and, of course, was taken to a typical, hysterical, 'Bush is the devil' site. It said that Bush was tearing down, reversing, appointing, rewarding, stacking, slashing, gutting, attacking, alienating etc. Then I spotted the 'women's rights' section.

I want to know when feminists reduced women to having sex and making babies? Apparently, we do nothing else and we have no other issues. I'm not exaggerating, go look. There is not one issue that isn't about sex and babies. It's pathetic that this is what feminism has become. In my teens I used to call myself a feminist. Now I wouldn't, mostly because I wouldn't want to associate with these lunatics who turn women into these one-dimensional characters. My #1 issue is preventing myself from getting blown up on the subway. #2 is not giving away half my salary, as I have for the past few years, in taxes. Whether the Bush administration gives money to foreign clinics that offer abortion isn't in the top 1000. Neither is sex education in schools. How many women actually have a stake in these two, supremely limited issues? And of these, how many would take NOW's radical positions? What is NOW's purpose if not to represent women? What does it say about feminism that the feminists treat women with such disdain?

Reviewing Reagan

Oschisms reviews the biased documentary while Clarified reviews the biased biopic.

Clearly I should be living in a 'red' state....

...because this is the kind of place where I want to spend my life.

Also via Free Republic, a nice place to spend Christmas Day.

Michael Moore puts down the crackpipe?

Well, sort of. Apparently, he makes some admissions in his book in the name of luring Republicans to the left. From a review of his latest book:

"Mumia probably killed that guy…." Not just a "guy," Michael, but a cop helpless on the ground into whom Mumia emptied a gun.

"MTV sucks…." Moore continues, giving far more detail than my quick thumbnail extracts here. "Granola is bad for you. It is filled with sugar and fat…. The sun is good for you…. People who commit violent crimes should be locked up…. Your children do not have a right to privacy…. Not all unions are good, and, in fact, many of them are just plain lousy…. SUVs are not inherently evil…. Getting back to nature is a dumb idea…. Bill O’Reilly makes a few good points…. Animals don’t have rights…. Nixon was more liberal than the last five presidents we’ve had…. Too many of us [on the Left] hold a hoity-toity view of religion….This arrogance is a big reason the lower classes will always side with the Republicans."

Of course, no book of his would be complete without ridiculous 'facts' like this:

"You are never going to be rich" like Horatio Alger, writes Moore. "The chance of that happening is about one in a million." (This means that in our nation of 293 million people, we have only 293 millionaires.…when in fact we have literally millions of citizens with a net worth in excess of a million dollars – and would have millions more if government greed and excessive taxation could be ended…but is it fair to apply logic to an utterly irrational hyper-Leftist ideologue like Moore?)

Via Free Republic.

Security

Last Christmas I wrote about Norman Rockwell's painting, 'Freedom of Worship' (you'll have to scroll down to Dec.26th) and the words 'Each According to the Dictates of His Own Conscience' across it. It's a great painting. I wrote about being a Jew spending Christmas with my Catholic boyfriend, his Catholic brother and their Jewish mother. You can be anything you want to be in America and I love that about this country.

Which brings me to this: this year, I'm celebrating Christmas with that same boyfriend and his mom. His brother, however, won't be there. He joined the Navy last spring and left for basic training in September. I'm thinking about him today and about the other men and women in our military who can't be home for Christmas because they have a noble purpose that those of us lounging on our couches with our laptops just don't. If you have freedom of worship today, thank a veteran or current soldier. Thank you, Kevin. I hope you are happy and safe and know that what you're doing means so much to so many.

'Spot On' commenter Will forwarded this to me recently. It's called 'Sleeping Soundly?'

HOW DID YOU SLEEP LAST NIGHT?
Bed a little lumpy...
Toss and turn any...
Wish the heat was higher...
Maybe the a/c wasn't on...
Had to go to the john..
Need a drink of water...

Yes...
It is like that!
Count your blessings, pray for them,
Talk to your Creator and the next time when...
the other car cuts you off and you must hit the brakes,
or
you have to park a little further from Walmart than you want to be,
or
you're served slightly warm food at the restaurant,
or
you're sitting and cursing the traffic in front of you,
or
the shower runs out of hot water,
Think of them...Protecting freedom!

Religion of Convenience

Howard Dean sees the light:

''Christ was someone who sought out people who were disenfranchised, people who were left behind,'' Dean said. ''He fought against self-righteousness of people who had everything . . . He was a person who set an extraordinary example that has lasted 2000 years, which is pretty inspiring when you think about it.''

He acknowledged that he was raised in the ''Northeast'' tradition of not discussing religious beliefs in public, and said he held back in New Hampshire, where that is the practice. But in other areas, such as the South, he said, he would discuss his beliefs more openly.

Losing his religion

Drudge is reporting that Howard Dean will come out as a religious man in today's Boston Globe. The paper will report that Dean says that 'he's a 'committed believer in Jesus Christ' and he expects to increasingly include references to Jesus and God in upcoming speeches'

This should go over very well with the anti-war crowd, I just have a feeling.

Blogs for Bush links to a New Republic article, written before the announcement, that notes what a problem Dean was going to have when it came to his religious beliefs. Good thing he's making that mad dash toward religion:

It's common for liberals to complain that Bush talks about religion too much. But few Americans agree. Recent polling by Pew shows that only 14 percent think Bush talks about his faith too much. The vast majority, 62 percent, like the way he deploys religion, and 11 percent think he doesn't invoke it enough. This is one reason there's little hope of Dean riding a secular backlash into the White House, but it is not the only one. Although the number of Americans who attend church less than once per year is growing, it is still at 30 percent, a decided minority. According to the pollster John Zogby, "Appealing to secular voters might help you win a Democratic primary--but that's it." The University of Akron's John Green, the pollster who has looked the hardest at the electoral implications of religion, argues that voters "are looking for signs that they can trust a candidate. One of the things that they are looking for, one of the things that makes sense to them, is religiosity. If they don't see it, they may have a hard time voting for a candidate."

KTU as microcosm for the Democrat's problems?

You really have to be from New York (preferably from the outer boroughs) to get it, but my friend, and neighbor, Julia Gorin lays out the case in Opinion Journal and is right on about her findings. I rarely feel more in touch with what those outside the political world or blogosphere are thinking than when I'm in Brooklyn.

An adjacent Brooklyn story is this, Peter told it to me: One of Peter's friends was looking into joining the Libertarian party. Peter told him about some libertarian friends of mine who believe in no government, to the point where they think that the country's defense should be left to individual states. One of his friends said 'well, Manhattan would be taken over immediately because everyone would be protesting in Central Park but at least Brooklyn and the Bronx would put up a fight.'

Exactly.

With apologies to 50 Cent.

Lileks is on fire.

Get this person help immediately!

Seldom does stupidity show itself quite so obviously.

Via Free Republic.

What? No pardons for cash? How completely odd.

From the Note's email edition:

Gary Fields of the Wall Street Journal writes an in-depth look at George W. Bush's presidential pardoning patterns — including the Thanksgiving turkeys, he's only handed out 17 pardons since he took office. The only two presidents with fewer pardons than 43: William Henry Harrison, who died within a month of taking office, and James Garfield, who died 6 months into his first term.

Music

I promised commenter Bobm that I would make his 9 year old son a cd of clean, good rap music. After yesterday's comments on my 50 Cent post, I figured I would expand on that cd by devising a list of rap songs for people who aren't into rap. The idea is to keep it clean and accessible. This is what I have so far, I invite all of you to add songs you think should be on the cd in the comment section:

1. 'Discipline' by Gangstarr. The other recommended song is 'Take it Personal' though 'Discipline' is the one I chose for the overall message.

2. 'Get it together' by Beastie Boys. Yes, I realize I should probably choose something off of 'License to Ill' but there is the boy's father to consider as most of the songs off 'License' are shouted while those off 'Ill Communication' are more toned down. Actually, just listened to this song and there is quite a bit of cursing on it so its not making the cd for the 9 year old anyway.

3. 'Scenario'- Tribe Called Quest. Again, I know there are better, less popular songs by Tribe but the idea is for there to be some recognition of the songs. I don't know that many 9 year olds with extensive attention spans.

4. '21 Questions'- 50 Cent.

5. 'Children's Story'- Slick Rick. I love Slick Rick. They just don't make rap like this anymore, the bouncy, sing-along kind of rap.

6. 'What's The 411'- Mary J. Blige.- I just listened to it for the first time in awhile. Other than the dated references 'Girbauds hanging baggy', there is also more cursing than I remember. Not making the cd.

7. 'My Favorite Song (Got Some Teeth)'- Obie Trice. The funnest song I've heard in a long time. Oschisms described it as typical party music of our youth. Exactly.

8. 'Passin' Me By'-Pharcyde. This song bridged the gap between my brother and me in regards to music. I couldn't relate to his 'Ten Crack Commandments'-esque music by gangsters like Biggie or wanna-be gangsters like Tupac. He didn't like Tribe or Beastie Boys. Getting him into Pharcyde made riding in his car with him a lot better.

9. 'Bump Heads'- Eminem, 50 Cent, Tony Yayo, Lloyd Banks.Another one that may not be making it onto the cd for the 9 year old but that older people may like.

10. Bonnie & Clyde- Jay Z and Beyonce. One of those sweet 'love my girl' rap songs. Another example of this is 'Good Girl' by Jadakiss and Timbaland.

11. 24 Hours to Live- Mase featuring Lox and DMX. A great song about what these rappers would do if they had 24 hours to live. Of course, Mase left rap because he said G-d came to him and said that he should be a man of G-d. He's a Reverend now.

I'm going to be adding songs as I think of them.

Murder at Rao's

The question is: will this make it easier or harder to get a table?

The story is here.

My obsession with going to Rao's is noted here.

Via Doug (yes, again, this is what happens when you spend all day on IM with someone).

About today's mood music

Yes, that's right. I like 50 Cent. A lot. And it's not just because, as Doug just put it on Instant Messenger: You can take the girl from the ghetto, but you can't take the ghetto from the girl. I think he's a good rapper and his beats are perfect for when you're getting ready to go out and are dancing around your house. He's not for children and my endorsement of his cd does not imply that I am going to love every thing he does and says. I just like his music and thinks he's very nice to look at.

And then there's the rest of the paper

Also on the Times' Editorial Page is Paul 'Maureen Dowd may be crazy but I'm catching up quick' Krugman. His latest piece tears into Conrad Black for unethical behavior in his ties to Hollinger for which he is currently being investigated. This is interesting in light of Krugman's relationship with Enron, which, as James Taranto has amply covered, bordered on the unethical itself. Glass houses? Stones? What? Krugman takes this opportunity to rail against that all powerful (having all of one television station) rightwing media. I think he forgot what he was writing about half way through and decided to fall back on the subject he feels most comfortable with (hint: it ain't ethics). Doug alerted me to the piece, I make it a habit to avoid the Times op-ed page, and asked 'I wonder if he realizes how far outside the debate his voice actually is. I almost feel bad for him' Yeah. Me too. Ha.

The paper also has an article on poor, silent, painfully shy Hillary Clinton finally 'finding her voice'. As the email edition of the Note notes 'How many times can the Times write this same story, we wonder?' It depends. How badly do they want her to be the nominee (answer: very, very badly).

Car Wreck

For a Republican, this primary season has brought ample opportunities to point and laugh at the men (that's right, I'm not even going to mention the not a shot in hell female candidate) running for the Democratic nomination. My latest favorite embarrasement has been the very public Clark/Dean argument over whether Dean asked Clark to be his running mate. Clark says he did. Dean says he didn't. I say hahahahaha, this is so funny.

David Brooks has a great piece today about the implosion within the Democratic party. I have to admit, I've come a bit late to the Brooks fan club. I can say that the phrase 'a conservative on the New York Times editorial page' didn't make me run for the newstand. Brooks is interesting, he has a different take than I've seen on several subjects (his gay marriage piece springs to mind in which he writes that having 'several sexual partners in a year is committing spiritual suicide' and makes the case that gay marriage will prevent such behavior). His points today about the Democratic establishment's reaction to Dean is dead on.

Are the Brits all on their Christmas break?

Because I would love to read some comments from soccer-crazy people on this (non-Brits welcome too).

A radicalized American.

Peter has a must-read post about his post-9/11 political shift.

Somebody make him stop!

'And I would say to the Europeans, I pledge to you as the American president that we'll consult with you first. You get the right of first refusal on the security concerns that we have. We'll bring you in.'-Wesley Clark

Via Blogs for Bush.

What I deal with

Peter: Did you know, if you lose your fingers they can reattach them?
Me (too early for conversation, how can he not know this yet?): Look at 'em go.
Peter (moving his pinky around as if to wonder what he'd look like without it and then with it reattached): Isn't that cool?
Me (could it be that he needs a fourth blog?): Mmm.

UPDATE:

Peter: I feel like Howard Stern's wife. Nothing is private.
Me: You should comment that.

What was life like before Ebay?

I
am
obsessed.

Racists on the left?

But how can that be?

How often is he going to say this until he gets it?

"I hope that's not on television"-Wesley Clark

Blogsurfing/Therapy

Last night I accidentally found some British blogs. They were heartbreaking, to me, in their uniform anti-Americanness. So today, I visited the Eatonweb Portal and am currently surfing British sites. It's better than it seemed last night. I found at least one that I've bookmarked and will be returning to.

As for many of the other ones, I don't know why I get so worked up over blogs that get like 7 hits a day, have the word 'mediocrity' in their self-description, and think its the height of humor to compare Bush to Hitler. I guess I just always expect better from the Brits. It's a culture that I loved so much and continue to love. I really always thought that my first serious purchase as an adult would be a flat in Edinburgh or a house in Forres. I don't think I have that dream anymore and it isn't me that has changed. I was always American, Jewish, Zionist, Republican and very political. Now these are dirty words in most of Europe and unfortunately, Britain isn't an exception to this. I've lost several British friends now over politics. I still have many friends that I adore in Britain and knowing them continues to makes me very happy. Still, the ones that I've lost have really affected me. I haven't lost a single American friend (that currently lives in America, anyway) over politics no matter how bad our disagreements have gotten or how insanely leftist they are. Interestingly, the ones in Britain who continue to be my friends are the ones that I had discussed politics with pre-9/11. They know that my political thinking didn't begin on 9/12 and I know that theirs didn't either. In fact, these are the ones most likely to engage me on my site (as opposed to coming on once, saying something one-dimensional, telling me what a crappy site I have, and being absolutely horrified when I or any of my commenters respond). The ones who discovered politics only after it became fun to ridicule president Bush or to compare America to Nazi Germany are the ones I can't connect with anymore.

A large factor is, of course, the very existence of this site. It is somewhere that people can check into daily to get a running commentary from me on every little thing. Of course I'm going to write things people disagree with. Of course I'm going to piss people off. This site was something that I had planned to do for years. I didn't know about blogs then. I often discussed starting some type of website and always mentioned that it would have a rightwing bent. I had asked people like commenters Bobby and Graeme if they wanted to write for it. I believe Graeme was going to do the 'Commie Corner' or something. Most people that knew me knew it was one of my plans. I also planned to have a music site but found that I had little to say about music other than 'I like this' or 'I don't like this'. Anyway, the point is that this blog, like my political opinions, wasn't born out of 9/11 either. I didn't wake up one day and decide that America needs a strong foreign policy (though, yes, I was certainly more isolationist than I am today-9/11 did change that), that I like smaller government, lower taxes, lower spending, that I think evil exists (hi, I was born in Russia), that I love America, and that comparing an American president (ANY American president) to Hitler will make me see you as stupid and will make me say mean things like 'I hope he kills as many members of your family as Hitler did mine so you could really understand what you're saying'.

Here's the interesting thing, to me, about politics and friendship: the more common ground you have politically, the less you discuss it. For example, I rarely discuss politics with the many friends I've made in the last few years through the rightwing political circuit in NYC. What's the point? We agree on most things. Even the things we disagree over remain areas of argument where we respect each other. How can I respect someone who says 'Bush is soooo stupid. Can't you just see the stupid look on his face?' Listen, if that's your argument then we have little to say to each other.

Maybe things won't always be this way though I suspect they will. Basically, any leader that I will admire in America will probably be skewered in Europe. I've been watching a Reagan documentary recently with Oschisms and the similarities between his presidency and that of George W. Bush are unbelieveable. The idiot protestors who saw America as a bigger threat than the Soviet Union, who thought that talking was going to solve anything (when, in fact, Russia only got serious about the talks when they thought America was going to be able to build the much-ridiculed-by-liberals SDI system), those who dismissed Communism the way they dismiss Islamofascism today. Didn't being on the wrong side of history once already teach them anything? And it does matter that Europe violently hates these leaders. I will vote for George W. Bush in 2004 (barring some unforseen circumstances). To call him stupid is to call me stupid. To call him evil is to call me evil. It's not that hard to understand.

I hope that someday I'll be able to buy that property in Scotland and spend days in my favorite pub writing in my notebook, listening to British indie rock, and connecting with people of a culture that I feel I understand so well. I've been told often that I'm too much of an optimist.

Great moments in government sponsored journalism

From Andrew Sullivan:

BAATHIST BROADCASTING CORPORATION: An internal BBC email tells its reporters not to refer to Saddam as a dictator. From the Daily Telegraph's London Spy column:

"An email has been circulated telling us not to refer to Saddam as a dictator," I'm told. "Instead, we are supposed to describe him as the former leader of Iraq. Apparently, because his presidency was endorsed in a referendum, he was technically elected. Hence the word dictator is banned. It's all rather ridiculous." The Beeb insists that the email merely restates existing guidelines. "We wanted to remind journalists whose work is seen and heard internationally of the need to use neutral language," says a spokesman.

Just when you think they couldn't get any worse, the BBC goes and does something like this. Under these guidelines, would Hitler have ever been called a "dictator"? He was originally elected in a freer election than Saddam, after all.

Other uses for meetup.com

Peter has been none too happy that I've been getting drunk once a week at 'meet ups' with Republicans. So, he's decided to start meeting up with fellow music fans. Only, there don't seem to be too many music fans meeting up in NY. In fact, he and his friend are the only ones in the World Music Meetup category in NY. If you live in NY and want to get involved with some music meetups, check out his site (you may have to scroll down to the meetup post, it is blogger after all).

Quiz Fridays reinstated?

I took a really good one tonight. It's long but fun. I got 115. I actually don't know that much about 80's music but there is a large chunk of my brain that hears lyrics and never forgets them. I frequently complain that I could've been a rocket scientist if that wasn't the case.

I report, you decide.

Peter just said: 'who's the Commie now?'

We were talking about the Padilla case and Peter was under the impression he was being released completely. Not so. He's just being released from military custody and transferred to civilian authority. I said that in many ways this may be worse for him. In military custody, there is little room for any violence from his guards or from fellow prisoners. I don't know if he will be moved to solitary confinement, but if not, I can't see the boys in general population taking too well to a suspected terrorist. Peter then said 'good, he'll get raped in the showers'. I made a face and said 'yeah, I'm not ok with prison rape'. Then he called me a Commie. Then I said 'yeah, I'm blogging that'. Then he said 'why do you always take our problems to the internet?' To which, all I can say, is why not?

'Losing' the war on terror.

Libya Agrees to Give Up Weapons of Mass Destruction, Bush is on tv saying so right now. Hmm. Why do you suppose that is?

The nine dwarves

Scott at Slantpoint (yes, I realize we've already linked to him today, this is a side effect of having more than one blogger on the site) is bored with the Democrat candidates for president. I can't blame him.

I'm starting to wish Lieberman would promise to send concrete to Israel to turn barbed wire fences into inpenatrable walls. Something. Start a controversy. Or Sharpton promising to start a Congressional White Caucus because once a black is in the White House, whites would be relegated to minority status under his Presidency. Something.

Life just ain't that simple

Scott at Slantpoint, one of my favorite newly-discovered bloggers, is making a mess of behavioural economics this morning, arguing something he calls the "Numerology of Homelessness," which runs something like this (short quote as his site is mean to copy/pasters):

"When you hold free money up in the air, and widen the criteria making people eligible, they will come in hoardes." Hoardes!

Is Scott right to say that increasing availability of housing can affect the numbers of "homeless"? Sure, but not to the extent of the increase that has happened. Perhaps instead of staying with a brother-in-law, a family in hard times will now hit up a shelter for the few requisite months. But all that does is make our numbers more accurate in terms of how members of our society are dealing with increasing demands.

In Seattle, where we've had a lot of layoffs recently due to our state's particularly poor economy (worst in the nation), the composition of the homeless and food stamp users has changed significantly. The people who find themselves without jobs are not the smelly, uneducated alcoholics we typically associate with homelessness. They're men who walk up in suits they used to wear to the office. And for them, picking up items from the local food bank (more in need this year than ever before) is not a pleasant process where they are gleefully receiving stuff "for free!" People don't walk around flaunting their food stamps, bragging about how they didn't pay for those bagels in their lunch sack.

No, living in a homeless shelter or paying with food stamps is an act of desperation. In fulfilling those needs, people are forced to give up one value that economists from Adam Smith on have recognized as truly key: the ability to "appear in public without shame."

People in general don't want to be homeless. They don't want to live in shelters. They don't want to beg for bread, razors, toilet paper and tampons. That life, of never knowing what's next, of always being shamed, isn't something people choose because it's free. That's why the people who don't genuinely need help don't show up "in hoardes!" In fact, even those who need them don't show up shamelessly. In a much milder situation, I used to run really fast from the car to inside the Goodwill, in fear that classmates might see me and my mom having to shop there. And I never bought clothes that looked secondhand. I didn't want to walk around ashamed. Nobody wants to be excluded from the normalcy of public life without choice.

The truth is that it reflects poorly on all of us in society when the number of men and women and children who live without dignity is on the rise. While homelessness is one of the world's most misunderstood social problems, it is something that we can understand and change, if we have just a grain of faith in people and stop referring to them as purely money-driven creatures -- an idea economics itself has proved wrong.

Just a few resources on homelessness:
The Homeless Guy Blog, one of the first places I started learning about homelessness.
Causes of Homelessness, from the National Coalition for the Homeless.
Vagrant Gaze on homelessness in NYC.

US creating stability? No way...

The last decade has seen "post-Soviet" countries lumped together with the "Third World" in many a policy paper and international endeavor. Either that, or the region simply gets ignored.

But where most people see... nothing, I'm seeing an increase in pro-Western attitudes and support for the United States.

Today's example: Bulgaria, which will be allowing the US/NATO to establish military bases in the country (a sign of intended long-term friendship). Even more important than the government's willingness to partner with the US, and the parliament's approval, is the following statement:

"The decision puts an end to an almost five-year-old debate over the stationing of U.S. bases in Bulgaria and it comes as a result of the consensus in the Bulgarian society and Parliament after the 11 September attacks," [Foreign Minister Solomon] Pasi said. (emphasis mine)

Contrary to what some intellectuals and pseudo-intellectuals would have us believe, the whole world does not hate America. Its people is not the only society in the world to support the US government. Yes, there are good military/foreign aid/power-distribution reasons to support the United States.

But the average Bulgarian sees good reasons, too. As does also, though the powers of the Left have forgotten it, the average American.

Taking music liberties

If Kashei is doing it, surely her guest blogger can...

My "mood music" on this sunny December morning is James Yorkston's "6:30 is way too early" (to get up this cold December morning), which goes on to describe pretty much the rest of my life. But the standout track "Tender to the Blues" should work for you, too.

In other music news, I am disappointed to report that I have only even heard of 20 of Pitchfork's Top 50 albums for 2003. Ridiculous! That is when you know you are too "indie." Fortunately, however, their number one album choice is totally respectable: The Rapture's Echoes, which I heard straight through just three weeks ago. If you ask me (and I'm speculating), The Rapture will be one of this decade's definitive bands.

Speaking of definitive bands, while I love The: Cure/Smiths/Ramones, they are awfully difficult to do karaoke to. But if you find yourself struggling with them while in a futuristic karaoke pod at your local art gallery, do yourself a favor and don't switch to the Divinyls, thinking that the pods are soundproof. Because they're not. And there are some things that the Thursday night gallery crowd need not know about you.

Regardless, go see the installation (Lee Bul's "Live Forever"), should you be lucky enough to be near the kind of museums that offer karaoke pods and big empty rooms of strange lights and illusions that you put on little booties to go twirling around in.

Arts and culture flirting with politics, right here at alarmingnews.com. You must love us.

Sit down for this one: Deported Palestinian terrorist still terrorist even in Belgium

From BOTW:

Terrorist Terrorizes; Chocolate Makers Shocked
Remember those Palestinian terrorists who occupied and trashed the Church of the Nativity last year? A bunch of them were exiled to Europe, but now one, Khalil Mohammed Abdullah al-Nawara, has gotten himself into hot water in Belgium, Ha'aretz reports:

His arrest "has stirred unrest and embarrassment in Belgium," the paper adds. Enlightened European opinion, after all, can understand why Arabs would be eager to murder Jews, but blowing up a European post office is another matter entirely. How embarrassing for the Belgians that al-Nawara apparently doesn't share their finely tuned sense of moral nuance.

December is such a sad month

First Lileks goes on an extended vacation and now James Taranto. Don't these people know how much I love reading them every day? (Yes, I'm selfish, but as my brother just pointed out to me: selfishness isn't one of the unallowed things under the Ten Commandments.)

Hmm.

Maybe doing drugs does support the terrorists.

More Little Red Hen

A non-Republican friend of mine sent me this:

Once upon a time, on a farm in Arkansas, there was a little red hen who scratched about the barnyard until she uncovered quite a few grains of wheat.

She called all of her neighbors together and said, "If we plant this wheat, we shall have bread to eat. Who will help me plant it?"

"Not I," said the cow.
"Not I," said the duck.
"Not I," said the pig.
"Not I," said the goose.

"Then I will do it by myself," said the little red hen. And so she did. The wheat grew very tall and ripened into golden grain.

"Who will help me reap my wheat?" asked the little red hen.

"Not I," said the duck.
"Out of my classification," said the pig.
"I'd lose my seniority," said the cow.
"I'd lose my unemployment compensation," said the goose.

"Then I will do it by myself," said the little red hen, and so she did.

At last it came time to bake the bread. "Who will help me bake the bread?" asked the little red hen.

"That would be overtime for me," said the cow.
"I'd lose my welfare benefits," said the duck.
"I'm a dropout and never learned how," said the pig.
"If I'm to be the only helper, that's discrimination," said the goose.

"Then I will do it by myself," said the little red hen. She baked five loaves and held them up for all of her neighbors to see.

They wanted some and, in fact, demanded a share.
But the little red hen said, "No, I shall eat all five loaves."

"Excess profits!" cried the cow.
"Capitalist leech!" screamed the duck.
"I demand equal rights!" yelled the goose. The pig just grunted in disdain.

And they all painted "Unfair!" picket signs and marched around and around the little red hen, shouting obscenities.
Then a government agent came, he said to the little red hen, "You must not be so greedy."

"But I earned the bread," said the little red hen.

"Exactly," said the agent. "That is what makes our free enterprise system so wonderful. Anyone in the barnyard can earn as much as he wants. But under our modern government regulations, the productive workers must divide the fruits of their labor with those who are lazy and idle."

And they all lived happily ever after, including the little red hen, who smiled and clucked, "I am grateful, for now I truly understand."

But her neighbors became quite disappointed in her. She never again baked bread because she joined the "party" and got her bread free.

And all the Democrats smiled. 'Fairness' had been established. Individual initiative had died but nobody noticed; perhaps no one cared, as long as there was free bread.

Hatin' Howard Dean

Jonathan Chait, he of 'I hate the way Bush walks, I hate the way Bush talks, but that's not irrational' fame, has started an anti-Dean blog on The New Republic called 'Diary of a Dean-o-phobe' where he goes on, at length, about how much he hates Dean. I'm thinking it's going to be a nice opposition research site for the Bush campaign, when the time comes, which is good, but Chait really needs to let go of all these various hatreds. Let a little light into your life, Jon.

Let's go.

I need a vacation.

I'm sure its because they are so nice

Italian newspaper La Padonia is reporting that 'Iran sold Saddam to the Americans. It says Saddam had secretly contacted Iran to arrange for his asylum there, but Iranian secret police with the help of Iraqi governing council member Jalal Talabani turned him over to the US forces.'

Now, again, I'm no expert, but does it seem like Bush the dummy was completely right about what would bring terrorist nations like Iran to their knees? Why would Iran help us? Why did Syria send back Uday and Quasay when they tried to cross over into that country? Could it be the American military right over their borders? Or am I being simplistic?

Via Blog Iran.

Dems gone mad

The Washington Times has a nice collection of all the completely kooky thing the Democrats have been spouting lately. I'm not saying there is no room for a party of conspiracy theorists, I'm sure there is. It's just a touch sad that that is what they've been relegated to be.

Via Blogs for Bush.

UPDATE: Lileks has more on the loony left:

But the Democrats want revenge. For Florida. For Bush's refusal to let France and Germany decide American foreign policy. For invading poor, helpless, never-hurt-a-fly Iraq. For making the Dixie Chicks feel uncomfortable. Not for drilling in ANWR, but for wanting to. For this and a thousand other sins, Bush must pay -- and if al-Qaida detonates a nuke in the Baltimore harbor during President Dean's term, it'll be Bush's fault for toppling the fascists of Iraq without the approval of Syria and China.

If Gore wants these people on his side in '08, it's because he thinks they'll still be spitting mad in four years. And he's right. They will be. They will hate Bush more than Osama bin Laden, right up until the day the Islamists target mixed-gender schools, abortion clinics and gay-rights counseling centers.

Then they might finally realize it's not only their war too -- it always has been.

Via Instapundit.

Have you read Mark Steyn today?

Seriously. Go now.

Via Doug.

The Diane Sawyer interview

I got carried away with anticipation of the Reagan documentary last night and completely forgot that the president was giving an interview to Diane Sawyer. Dawn Summers loved the interview, so, clearly, I'm going to hate it. I haven't seen much mention of it in the blogosphere. The Corner noted it here, here and here but I have seen no mention of it anywhere else. Did any of you watch it? Opinions?

The third blog

Have you been checking out Peter's Daily Wire site? It's very, very funny.

Battles

I'm not as cool as my indie hipster boyfriend. It's true. I always discover the band of the moment well after the moment has passed. The Flaming Lips had been all the rage for a few years. I didn't notice. Then, about half a year ago, Peter's bandmate had a Zaireeka listening party. Zaireeka is a 4 cd set by the band that is meant to be played at the same time. It is interesting and beautiful. I was definitely into it.

The other night, my two good friends, SMFA and Majestorludi, came over for our semi-regular Friday night hangout date. Majestor went to put on some music and reached for Flaming Lips' 'Yoshimi Battles The Pink Robots'. I haven't stopped listening to it since. I subjected Ron to it yesterday on the way to the Republican-Jewish Coalition party and have been humming along to the songs all morning today.

Anyway, Peter already wrote about this on his Pandavox site but I'd like to draw attention to the first song on the Yoshimi album. It's called 'Fight Test' and its about the fact that sometimes you have to fight (whether it's to battle pink robots or terrorists and tyrants), and that there is no virtue in 'always being cool' and stepping aside. Read into it what you will.

Fight Test

I thought I was smart, I thought I was right
I thought it better not to fight
I thought there was a virtue in always being cool
So it came time to fight, I thought I’ll just step aside
And that the time would prove you wrong
And that you would be the fool

I don’t know where the sunbeams end and that the starlights begin
It’s all a mystery

Oh, to fight is to defend
If it’s not now then tell me when would be the time
That you would stand up and be a man
For to lose I could accept
But to surrender I just wept
And regretted this moment, oh that I, I was the fool

I don’t know where the sunbeams end and that the starlights begin
It’s all a mystery
And I don’t know how a man decides what’s right for his own life
It’s all a mystery

‘Cause I’m a man, not a boy
And there are things you can’t avoid
You have to face them when you’re not prepared to face them
If I could, I would, but you’re with him
I’d do no good
I should have fought him but instead I let him, I let him take you

I don’t know where the sunbeams end and that the starlights begin
It’s all a mystery
And I don’t know how a man decides what’s right for his own life
It’s all a mystery

Just a little New York story

I visited my hometown of Brooklyn on Monday night. I borrowed my mother's car to return to Manhattan and assured her I would bring it back on Tuesday. When I got back to Manhattan, I was going to put the car in a high priced parking lot. By the most holiest of miracles, I found a legal parking spot right behind my building which didn't require me to move my car by 8am. I called my mother on Tuesday morning and asked her if I could bring it back on Wednesday instead, since I had by some freakish chance found a spot. She said that would be fine.

Tonight, I was heading home from a party and had some time to kill before going to Oschism's house to watch a Reagan documentary (that's right, I'm a geek, what of it). I was a little early so decided to do something I frequently do when I have a car and some time: drive to Rao's restaurant on 114th street and beg them for a reservation. The last time I stopped by they told me they were booked through 2004 and they would start taking reservations for 2005 sometime in late 2003. Yes, I'm freaking serious.

I called my brother as I drove and told him where I was going. He said 'why, so they can laugh at you?' Ha. Ha. Then he said 'wait, are you driving?' And I said 'yes'. And he said 'you took the car out of a legal spot?' I started laughing and said 'you know about my parking spot?' He said 'everyone knows about your parking spot.'

Well, the guy at Rao's didn't laugh, per se, and he did give me some good tips on how to score a reservation. And, by the strangest 'lightning strikes twice in one spot' coincidence, I found a parking spot tonight, same place as last night. I was so confused that I asked a traffic cop on the block if I was dreaming. But no, it's a legal spot and it's all mine. Stunning.

P.S If someone can get me into Rao's, I'm buying.

Um, eww.

This photo is beyond disturbing. They look like they're about to make out. I have no idea if its photo-shopped, but I suspect its not.

The Death Penalty

My Commie boyfriend and I have been discussing what should happen to Saddam Hussein. I am, as always, partial to killing him live on tv. Peter is against the death penalty and the fact that this man killed hundreds of thousands of people and brought suffering to his nation doesn't sway him one bit. He also has some cockamamie, longwinded (thankfully the phone rang while he was explaining it so I didn't have to hear the whole thing) explanation on what we should do with bin Laden, if and when we find him, that doesn't involve killing him. So, open thread readers: what do you think?

I love Primary season

Democrats attacking Democrats. What can be more fun?

For all you Mets fans

Which team does Saddam support?

Via The Corner.

Wouldja look at that

France backs Iraq debt aid.

Now, I'm not jumping to conclusions, and it may well be that James Baker is a master negotiator who got Chirac to reach this conclusion. But, does it seem odd to anyone else how this coincides so conveniently with the capture of Saddam? Is France worried about what he was going to say (and I mean, its the most interesting theory that I've heard so far, which is nothing more than a theory)?

Via 'Spot On' reader DTDT.

UPDATE: Germany Agrees to Help Relieve Iraqi Debt. Bush is nowhere near as good at this whole 'alienating our allies' thing as previously thought.

Jewcy.

My four favorite t-shirts:

1. The one I designed myself that has the words 'not a sheep' on the front and the Republican elephant on the back.
2. The one that says Michael Moore Hates America.
3. The one that has the name of my favorite pub (in which I spent quite a bit of time) in Aberdeen, Scotland, that one of the bartenders gave to me.
4. The one that says Jewcy on it.

Apparently, number 4 has become cool enough for the Guardian to mention it. Not only is the shirt (and the company that makes it) hip, but apparently Jews are the 'in' thing these days. Well, in America, anyway. I actually think its just another example of the rift between the US and Europe at the moment. You think Jews are the biggest problem in the world? We'll celebrate them and make them cool.

Via 'Spot On' reader Bobby.

Anger Management

The Democrats should really look into it.

Via 'Spot On' reader Bobm.

What can we learn from cartoon superheros?

Go read Doug at Initial Misconceptions to find out.

Salam Pax on Saddam's capture:

Why do all the interesting things happen when I am not in baghdad?
at first I couldn't believe it when I heard it, I got too excited when they reported that the vice president Izat Ibrahim was arrested and then it turned out to be nothing, so my reaction was "yeah right". but the images on TV left no chance to doubt. He looked like a tramp getting a physical and for some reason you expected him to bite that soldier's finger a la Hanibal Lecter. But he just sat there. There was another moment when the GC members were describing their meeting with Saddam and told the journalists about the deriding remarks he made when they asked him about the Sadir's assasination and the mass graves, he sounded like he has totally lost it.
I want a fully functioning Saddam who will sit on a chair in front of a TV camera for 10 hours everyday and tells us what exactly happened the last 30 years. I do not care about the fair trial thing Amnesty Int. is worried about and I don't really care much about the fact that the Iraqi judges might not be fully qualified, we all know he should rot in hell. but what I do care about is that he gets a public trial because I want to hear all the untold stories.

NYC rightwing events

There are at least three excellent events happening this week in NYC for Republicans. You can visit this blog for more information on them.

On Thursday there will be a Republican Party Meetup held in locations all over the country. The one in NYC will be, yet again, at the Auction House Bar on East 89th between First and Second Avenues.

If you're looking to get a meetup going in your area, drop me an email and I'll see if I can be of some help.

The contracts 'scandal'

Even my most feverish anti-Bush friends (looking at you Majestorludi, among others) loved that Bush refused contracts to our so-called allies. No matter your beliefs on Bush, the war, or making nice-nice with those loonies across the pond, you gotta admit that Mark Steyn is talking sense here:

On the contracts:

We're not talking about frosting the French, Germans, Russians and Canadians out of Iraq entirely. If you're a Paris printing company and you wish to open a new plant in Tikrit to pump out paperbacks of the latest French bestseller claiming that Dick Cheney and Halliburton were behind 9/11, go ahead. If you're a German corporation that manufactures those giant puppets of Bush and Blair for anti-war protests and you'd like to outsource the work to a marionette factory in Karbala, I'm sure they'd appreciate the business.

What's at issue here is whether the American Defence Department should use American taxpayers' money to offer American government contracts in Iraq to companies from countries that actively obstructed and continue to obstruct American policy in Iraq. That's a legitimate national security interest, and no more "illegal" than, say, Belgium's refusal to sell Britain artillery shells during the Gulf War.

On our 'allies':

On Iraq, France, is on the other side - Saddam was their man, to the end. Germany is in a state of semi-derangement - a third of Germans under 30 believe that America organised the 9/11 attacks, a statistic only a polling point or two behind the excitable young men of Pakistan's North-West Frontier.

Canada thinks that it can enjoy north American prosperity without contributing to north American defence. And Russia is already undermining the next American goal - under cover of the anodyne EU/IAEA position on Iran, it is continuing to assist the mullahs' nuclear programme.

So it's not (just) payback, it's also about the next round of problems. One can think of several terms for folks who behave in these various ways, but "allies" isn't one of them - unless "allies" is now a synonym for, respectively, saboteurs, poseurs, nutters and enemies.

Quote of the Day:

"President Bush sends his regards."-one of the Special Forces officers who captured Saddam.

Via Blogs for Bush.

The Blogroll:

I've changed some things on the blogroll, namely removing a couple of blogs that hadn't been updated in a few months. If you are one of those bloggers and you start updating again, do let me know and I'll reinstate you. I've also decided to leave, for now, two blogs (I'm looking at you-with encouragement- American Scene and Yale Free Press Blog) that don't update that frequently.

I've seen people do this before and I thought it was kind of cool, so today seems like a good day to do a summary of the blogroll (can y'all tell that I'm procrastinating on something?):

1972 writes about Russia, Germany and France not getting any contracts and notes that there is a 'difference between being magnanimous and being a patsy' and that these countries should 'live with the consequences of their own moral bankruptcy and strategic error.' Yes they will.

Andrew Sullivan writes 'I have never been prouder to be an Anglo-American, to have done in our time what so many before us have done - to broaden the possibilities of liberty, to bring hope, to restrain the violent men and evil ideologies that are each generation's responsibility.' I couldn't be prouder to live here either. My life could be so different right now.

Annika discusses NPR's 'whiny', 'depressed' coverage. But, of course.

Ari has a post from a few days ago (the poor girl has been sick, go wish her well) about the sensation of a new person. I left a comment that Peter really didn't appreciate.

Best of the Web did an aforementioned special edition weekend post. It's excellent, as always. My favorite note was that Bandar Bin Sultan of Saudi Arabia used the word 'chutzpah'. Progress?

Blogs for Bush has a round-up of a bunch of 'Saddam caught' posts floating around the blogosphere.

Blue Star Academia has a list of the best Christmas songs.

Kevin Patrick's Bush-Cheney 2004 Blog assesses Saddam's capture in terms of the financial markets.

Clarified is challenging Lileks, James Taranto and myself to note where we want Saddam tried. Personally, I've been very consistent. Try criminals in the country that their crimes were committed. In this case-Iraq.

Confessions of a San Francisco Republican notes Jonah Goldberg's snark from a few days ago asking where the blogosphere was hiding on the news that the Supreme Court upheld the Campaign Finance law.

Daily Wire writes up Bush's surprise visit to the international space station.

Dean Esmay loves the armed forces. So do I.

Salam at Dear Raed hasn't blogged about the capture yet. Looking forward to when he will. Peter is making him a mix cd as I type this.

Elephant Rants is 'wow'-ed by Saddam's capture.

Executive Slacks has a write-up about mp3s.

Candace at Five Corners sneers (cutely) at the greeting girl at Abercrombie&Fitch.

I love America notes the happiness the Iraqis are feeling today.

Doug at Initial Misconceptions got into Law School and thinks this somehow means he doesn't have to post. :-)

New mama Deb at Insomnomaniac writes about Julie Birchil's exit from the Guardian.

Instapundit is everywhere and everything, as always.

Joe Grossberg links to a woman ranting about her average life.

Ken Wheaton thinks Saddam's capture is a liberal plot to cover up the really big news of yesterday.

Lileks is on semi-vacation but he posts a photo of his daughter (aka the cutest little girl on the whole planet).

Little Green Footballs is fighting its usual good fight against the Islamofascists of the world.

Merde in France has a funny photoshop-ed picture and one not so funny real one.

Miguel at Centellas notes that not all dictators have been taken down and captured.

The New York Young Republican Club blog notes a bunch of excellent events happening this week.

NYU Blog Portal is a list of NYU blogs.

Oschisms has fixed up his site and lost all the comments in the process. Go leave him some new ones.

Pandavox thinks he's seen the bearded Saddam somewhere before.

Michael Parker is taking a blogging break.

Right Moment has a cool picture of what some are doing to deter criminals.

Slantpoint notes that the UN is pulling out of Afghanistan. Is there anything that they are good for?

The American Scene hasn't had a post in awhile and so gets nudged to post more (above).

The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler is gleeful Saddam is gone. As am I.

The Corner has been all over the capture all day.

Like Pandavox, The CounterRevolutionary sees someone familiar in the new Saddam.

The Politburo Diktat speculates on how the BBC might report the capture.

The View From Here is part of an actual newspaper so we'll have to wait to hear from Bobm when the paper comes out.

Gary Leff at View From the Wing tells you about the best travel deals and mileage accumulation techniques.

What's a Pundit links to Al Gore endorsing Howard Dean and says he knows a sign of doom when he sees one.

Who Tends the Fires says our team got two points by capturing Saddam. I say three. If that wasn't a jump shot, what is?

Yale Free Press Blog hasn't updated and also got words of encouragement above.

This is just a synopsis. Check out the blogs themselves for more.

You know its a good day....

....when James Taranto posts on a weekend.

Big News

I have become a parent (see sidebar links).

That's my man.

'You will never have to fear the rule of Saddam Hussein ever again.'- President George W. Bush on tv right now.

Yessssssssssss

My good friend, SMFA, crashed on my couch last night. It was my one day to sleep in late, it was understood by everyone that I would be doing just that. This morning at around 9:30am, my walkie-talkie on my cellphone went off. I thought it was odd that my friend Bill, a 'Spot On' commenter, would ring me so early on a Sunday morning. I turned if off and went back to sleep (sorry, Bill). About an hour later, SMFA knocked on my bedroom door. I told him to come in. He said 'no, K, I think you better come out here.' Getting dressed, I had horrible thoughts in my head. My first thought was this his car had gotten towed. There was some concern last night as to the legality of his parking spot. Then, I heard the tv on and my mind really starting racing. What had been blown up? Was it Israel? DC? Nukes? Geez.

Then I walked out and saw the news: Saddam Hussein has been captured.

Danced around my living room. Called Oschisms since I figured he'd still be asleep and would want, as I did, to be awoken to this news (UPDATE: just checked his site and he knew about the capture at 5:55am). Called Bill back. We 'wooooooo'ed into the phone. And now SMFA and I are watching Fox News (didn't want to risk CNN's being not-quite-happy-with-an-eye-on-2004 attitude), happily, on this snowy day.

Lets hope they do better than the Europeans

Afghans open constitutional convention.

I need a new (preferably Republican) boyfriend.

Pandavox endorses a candidate for president.

Killer or just a geek?

Peter sent me a cool quiz that shows you photos of people and asks you if you think they're computer programmers or serial killers. I did very poorly, 5/10.

Knowing who your friends are.

Instapundit provides the following excerpt with the comment: 'THEY'RE NOT ANTI-WAR -- they're just on the other side:'

Just when you thought the German “peace” movement couldn’t get much more hypocritical they take things to a whole new level. Last week the unbelievable lack of protest at the German government’s plutonium and arms deal with Communist China made it seem as the peace freaks had all rolled up into a big ball for a long winter hibernation.

Not so! The German TV news program “Panorama” uncovered some of the wonderful activities that particularly dedicated cadres of the German peace movement are currently engaged in. In the spirit of peace, a number of groups have started a fund-raising campaign entitled “10 Euros for the Iraqi Resistance”. The money will be provided to the Iraqi Patriotic Alliance (IPA) a group dedicated to carrying out attacks against US soldiers in Iraq in collaboration with Saddam loyalists. The common goal is to "liberate” the Iraqi people from the evil imperialist American occupiers. On their website these groups gush with enthusiasm about turning Iraq into another Vietnam for the USA.

Kashei loves presents

Last night, I went to hear Dick Morris at the New York Young Republican club. Several prominent website owners (not all are bloggers) were in attendance among them Scott, Doug, Ron, Elizabeth and Kevin.

Scott surprised me with a really cool present: a sugar packet with Richard Nixon's face on it. Unusual, to say the least. I was touched. Thanks, Scott.

How good do I need to be....

.....for whomever is going to be my santa to take me here?

UPDATE: Ok, potential santa just came in and said '$75 entrees?' with a scared look in his eyes. New applications for santa are now being accepted.

It's been a bad month for Bush...

....with conservatives anyway. I've already ranted about Taiwan, and other people have suitably torn apart the Medicare bill and the proposed Energy bill. And now we have the Supreme Court decision that the seriously flawed Campaign Finance Bill is somehow Constitutional. I'm no legal expert, but not being able to run ads whenever and however you wish seems to be not quite in line with 'freedom of speech' (ya know, that first amendment thingy). Why is this Bush's fault? Well, as many people have pointed out, the word was (and I have to admit that I believed the hype) that he signed that horrible thing with confidence that the Supreme Court would strike it down. They didn't.

Jonah Goldberg makes some good points (although he criticizes the blogosphere for being unusually silent on the ruling-sorry Jonah, some of us don't get paid to write about things as they happen):

Congress says you cannot criticize the government, and we all run to the parapets and scream bloody murder about censorship. But if Congress says instead, "There shall be no criticism of the government on days which end in "y," well, that's just a new "regulation." You're free to say whatever you want about the government, just so long as you don't say it on any of the seven days that just happen to end in "y."

The same goes for a regulation that limits or bans the amount of money you spend or when you spend it. The government might say: Sure, take out an ad in the New York Times denouncing the war in Iraq, or the partial-birth ban, or the way squirrels steal nuts from your birdfeeder, for all we care. But don't you dare spend any money on that ad. Or, don't you dare spend that money when people are actually holding an election or considering a law, or even when they're discussing the issue in question.

As you've no doubt heard, the Supreme Court has just upheld the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, better known as McCain-Feingold. It regulates to whom, how, and when citizens — acting in concert or alone — can express their political opinions. The details have been hashed out a zillion times. But the gist is: Groups like the National Rifle Association, the Sierra Club, the ACLU, and the NAACP will have a much more difficult time expressing their political views or criticizing politicians during an election season.

The law severely restricts the kinds of ads that can air or be printed in the run-up to an election. The intent is clearly censorious. John McCain has admitted, "If you cut off the soft money, you are going to see a lot less of (attack ads)." Marty Meehan, a major proponent of the law in the House, explained that you had to go after the ads airing right before the election, "because that's when people are paying attention." Would it be any less censorship if you passed a law that said you cannot criticize the government before midnight or after 4:00 A.M.? That's what we used to do with "adult"-oriented programming because it threatened the morals of children. Maybe we should do the same thing with speech that threatens the power of incumbents?

Also read this great post by the Spoons Experience. Though a conservative, he's not voting for Bush in 04. I expect we'll see a lot more of that.

It will be interesting to see if the interest groups abide by this law. I know of at least one that says it won't and prefers to get fined to keeping its mouth shut. Will this civil disobedience change anything? Probably not. But we can lend our support for the groups that do stand up and say they will not be silenced, not 60 days before an election, not 30 days before an election, not until the first amendment says that free speech is not what we think it is.

German Judge Frees 9/11 Suspect, Citing New Evidence

...And this is why we need to be trying these people ourselves. The questions, to me, are:
Do I trust anyone but Americans to take the problem of terrorism seriously?

Do I believe that those who threaten America should be judged in a courtroom in a country that semi-hates us?

Do I think that other countries should have a say in the punishment of those who seek to harm us?

I think you all know my one answer to all these questions: No.

Didja hear about the anti-terrorist protests in Iraq?

Yeah, neither did anyone else.

Robert Bartley's Passing

I haven't read a better commemoration than Oschisms has written.

The man with three blogs

Although I frequently mention Peter and his excess of blogs, I realized today that I hadn't permalinked to his newest site on my blogroll. Please welcome Daily Wire. It's a satire site. For the record, he also has a political and a music site.

The Little Red Hen

I had never heard of the Little Red Hen story. And yes, it is because, as Dawn Summers pointed out to me when I divulged that fact, I'm an immigrant. Anyway, after hearing the plot of the children's book, I like the analogy that is being made about our current situation with our 'allies' and the story of a hen who worked hard and kept the spoils to herself.

Noooooooooooooooooooo.

Homeland security chief, Tom Ridge, endorses legalizing undocumented immigrants.
What is going on with the Bush administration?!

Via Drudge.

Racist kiddie porn?

Jonah Goldberg on the Abercrombie&Fitch brouhaha.

Please, please, please

Go vote for Clare-ified (yes she is a huge liberal but she has my home phone number).

Which presidential candidate matches your opinions?

I guess the most shocking thing is that I have more in common with Lyndon LaRouche and Al Sharpton than with Wesley Clark. Is it because Clark has no real positions on anything? Click here to take the quiz and let me know how you do.

1. Your ideal theoretical candidate. (100%)
2. Bush, President George W. - Republican (85%)
3. Libertarian Candidate (47%)
4. Edwards, Senator John, NC - Democrat (46%)
5. Kerry, Senator John, MA - Democrat (45%)
6. Gephardt, Rep. Dick, MO - Democrat (43%)
7. Kucinich, Rep. Dennis, OH - Democrat (39%)
8. Lieberman, Senator Joe, CT - Democrat (30%)
9. Dean, Gov. Howard, VT - Democrat (28%)
10. Phillips, Howard - Constitution (26%)
11. LaRouche, Lyndon H. Jr. - Democrat (21%)
12. Sharpton, Reverend Al - Democrat (12%)
13. Clark, Retired General Wesley K., AR - Democrat (10%)
14. Moseley-Braun, Former Senator Carol, IL - Democrat (0%)

Via Dean Esmay

Now that's more like it.

Pentagon Bars Three Nations From Iraq Bids

The Pentagon has barred French, German and Russian companies from competing for $18.6 billion in contracts.

Via Spot On reader SMFA who writes 'how awesome are Wolfowitz and the boys not letting the "enemies" bid for contracts in iraq?'
UPDATE: EU to study legality of Iraq contract bidding. But of course.

Because women are naturally less violent.

In weak democracies and exclusionary governments the world over, people seem more willing than ever to sacrifice their lives for a statement.

The question is, which people?

We're getting used to seeing children with guns and bombs, but it's easy for us to blame that on their fathers. Their teachers. The men who "control their societies." Apparently, it's harder for us to think of terror as a force that can be women-driven.

In Russia, not long ago, Chechen women in black shrouds kept watchful eyes on terrified would-be theater-goers. But they were not in charge of the project, and some expressed a desire not to be there. Generally, they seemed to be more compassionate than their camo-clad counterparts. I hadn't thought much about female-driven terrorism in Russia since.

Until today, when a women suspected of intending to blow up the Parliament building detonated herself in Moscow.

Because at least there, if I'm not mistaken, that represents a change in the nature of women's role in global terrorism.

In Iraq. In Pakistan. In Spain, says Deborah Scroggins, women are taking their place in a movement that we seem to understand less and less. Is it surprising that we would find women, in some cases independently of men's organizations, charging forward with acts of terror? No, but given the popular idea that terror=Islamic terror and Islam=submissive women, something about it doesn't fit the way we've been thinking about terror.

Not to draw all my content from this month's Vogue, but I couldn't pass over this paragraph:

In March, a woman calling herself Um Osama told a London-based Arabic newspaper that Al Qaeda was setting up training camps of its own forr female martyrs. "We are building a women's structure that will carry out operations that will make the US forget its name," she boasted. The FBI responded to Um Osama by issuing a bulletin warning local law-enforcement agencies that Al Qaeda might start using women in its operations. But, as Jessica Stern [Harvard University] points out, while the Department of Homeland Security has required men over sixteen from many Muslim-majority countries to register with the police, it has made no such requirement of women from the same countries. Add to this the special advantages that Islamic customs of veiling and seclusion would give female terrorists, and you see why Stern and others believe it is only a matter of time before Al Qaeda will overcome whatever combination of religious scruples and macho attitudes has so far prevented it from using women.

Indeed, I can see that, thanks. And that's why I'll say that we can't fight terrorism without doing the kind of controversial investigation that some of my most conservative counterparts will call an attempt to "justify terror" or to "understaaaand" (in a whiny voice) "whyyy they do what they dooo." If our security policies are so restrictive in their application that we can't even account for half of the world's potential terrorists, we have a problem.

Is this really a "new development"? Does it reflect an increase in the number of serious female terrorists? Or does it, more worryingly/interestingly, reflect a change in the role that women play in international terrorism?

I'll go out there and say it does, and assert, further, that it will require some changes to our policies if we're going to know enough about terror to defend ourselves against it.

After all, there are still people around here who seem to believe we're, like, naturally nurturing or inherently anti-violent or always Democrats or something. And you know, in the face of that kind of ignorance, nothing gets done.

I'm confused, darling

Dear Mr President;

Like Kashei, I'm a little confused. And I'm going to tell you why.

See, I thought you were championing an America that didn't bend the principles of its foreign policy to please the powers that be. It's not like you were worried about making enemies by going into Iraq.

You speak of stability and peace, but you seem to be selective in the application. You speak of democracy and self-determination of peoples against authoritarian rule, but say that you will only support the "status quo" in places where the status quo is precisely against that idea.

I guess I just don't understand how a man who professes the virtues of freedom can support such blatant repression. I don't see how a paradigm of democracy can oppose it in its indigenous forms. I can't figure out how an America that should be strong and proud is bending to the will of another nation, because of what? Its economic power? Its weapons capabilities? Its strategic regional influence?

I just don't get it. So I'm giving you and your supporters a chance to tell me the real story. Why are the Taiwanese so unsupportable in contrast to "the Iraqi people"? The Iranians? How are those who suffer in China so different from those who suffered under Saddam? In a world of crisis, I want to see some consistency from the world's leaders. And apparently, I was mistaken about your principles and the policies that should follow. Maybe I'm missing something.

If I am, here's your chance to point it out.

Urg.

So, this guy in my class found my blog (can't say I was hiding it too well since I mentioned it in class several times). In particular, he found this post. He then sent it to some of my classmates (maybe all of them, who knows) and most importantly, to the teacher I mention in the post. Now, again, I might be naive and trusting, but I'm pretty stunned by this guy's actions. Maybe I'm not competitive enough or don't see hurting other people as a way to better my own life, but it seems clear that I'm quickly falling into the minority on these. So I have to ask: what is your take on this, dear readers? Why would someone do such a thing?

I have to admit that it's pretty funny that the thing I wanted to do most after learning of his actions is blog about it. Considering. :-)

Nononononononononono

How could he: Bush Opposes Taiwan Bid for Independence

Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office after a 40-minute meeting with Wen, Bush said he had told the premier, "The United States policy is one China."

"We oppose any unilateral decision by either China or Taiwan to change the status quo," Bush said, "and the comments and actions made by the leader of Taiwan indicate that he may be willing to make decisions unilaterally, to change the status quo, which we oppose."

I'm so disappointed in him. My heart actually hurts. Is it going to be third party voting again for me in 04?

One article....

.... two very different takes:

This one

And

this one (warning, the second link has some really graphic writing).

Overestimate my income, underestimate my mind

About the only thing Vogue estimates anymore is my style.

I picked it up for three good reasons: 1) Rene Zellweger. 2) A huge spread with favorite supermodel Karolina Kurkova. 3) A dazzling Liebovitz/Alice in Wonderland fantasy featuring Natalia Vadianova. In short, because the fashion photography was great.

Usually, anything Conde Nast "writes" is heinous -- I'm used to this. But even Vogue should be embarrassed at its choice of women for "heroines among us: extraordinary women of 2003."

Mariane Pearl absolutely deserves the title. Many of the others, a sampling of unique artists and one businesswoman with a cause, seem to be deserving. But there are two recipients of the award for whom there is no justification: Hilary Rodham Clinton and the Dixie Chicks.

With Clinton, it seems that the writer is digging deep for something to say about here. The first two paragraphs are about her laugh, in the context of a really, really bad joke that is supposed to be endearing, I guess. ("She chatted with the stylist and then watched in the mirror as he shaped her short blonde hair, lacquering it with layer after layer of hairspray...'Someone get a hammer!' she said, patting her stiff hair..." Does it really get any worse?)

Why is she a "heroine"? Does the article cite any accomplishments, real, imagined, or fabricated, that she might have made? No, but it does tell you whatshe wears. It does tell you that "she is a strong personality" and a 'celebrity who behaves like a public servant.'

How about those Dixie Chicks? Boy, did they put their life on the line. And for what a cause! "Just so you know, we're ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas." He should be from "Chelsea - the gayest neighborhood in New Yok - eating French food while listening to Frank Sinatra" like those good old well-cultured Dixie Chicks! It's not even like these women stood up for something and got flak for it. They haven't stood for anything but pure Bush-hatred.

Ahh.

I had forgotten: In some sectors of society, that's all it takes to be a hero. A woman soldier in Iraq would never be dressed up for a photo shoot to please the wealthy. "Heroism" isn't bravery, or principled decision-making, or self-sacrifice, not to these people. Heroism is taking partisan hatred to a new extreme.

I respect the work that Ms. Clinton has done and the hours she has dedicated to public service. But she is not a hero. Has she braved opposition? You bet. But so has every other member of Congress.

Let's not forget this is the Hillary who went to Baghdad to badmouth the president at the table of unenthusiastic troops. Let's not forget that these are the Dixie Chicks who've scorned their own musical constituency. Let's not forget that there are places in the world where heroism is more than brash disrespect for other people -- where it is bravery combined with nobility, honesty, and humility.

Maybe Jessica Lynch wasn't the hero that the Right made her out to be. But neither as these women any more remarkable than their hardworking counterparts, and I can think of many, many "heroines of 2003" more worthy of the title -- though maybe not as photogenic.

Not so fast, little girl

First, I have a declaration of love. I love this blog. I love it even more now that I can write on it. I love its readers. I love them even more when they are reading me. The happiness is almost too much to take.

Luckily, it's tempered by a healthy dose of worry about the power of the Dean campaign. Unlike Kashei, news like this makes me even less skeptical about Dean's chances.

Why? Because there are two groups of people who make up the electorate: those who pay attention and those who don't. Those who pay attention tend to split down clearer ideological lines. Those who don't, well, you just have to win them over.

Will most Americans notice if he calls that great mass of land that the Slavs tend to inhabit the "Soviet Union"? Nope. It will slip right by, I guarantee it. And his core won't care.

Will most Americans notice that the only thing he seems to be consistent about is saying "you have the power" every chance he gets? Nope; not even the politically informed tend to watch enough of him to let it bother them.

Does his core base notice? Sure, possibly. But they don't seem to care. With two bats on the internet, they can come up with over $200,000 in less than 48 hours in the name of "defeating the special interests," all because Club for Growth puts out an ad. It's like nuclear proliferation or something; the Right starts to fight and the Deaniacs say, "we dare you, we'll come up with the money to put you right back where you started." It's not suprising that this race to the spending top led to the Dean "supporter-decided" opt-out of matching funds earlier this year.

Now, the question is, will the rest of America buy into Dean? That depends. The endorsement from Jesse Jackson's not quite sexy enough to make the heartland care. Even words from Gore won't be enough to win him a sweeping victory. But what they can do is build establishment support from the money that matters, and that can win over those voters on its own.

Watch and see. I think the Dean story will be rewritten once he wins the primary, and capture a lot of hearts and minds.

Who knows? Madonna or Hillary might even rewrite it as a fairy tale for children. And lord knows how the people somehow eat that up.

Bush2004 Meetup Tonight

In New York, it's at the Auction House Bar on East 89th Between First and Second Avenues at 7pm but click here for information on one near you.

Now, I'm not calling the election or anything...

....but its true that I feel a little better about it every time Howard Dean opens his mouth.

Via The Note.

Euro-bust?

The Telegraph reports that less than half the population in the European Union's member states now support the EU project, according to polling results yesterday. Read down to the bottom for this great line 'When the sole East European member dared to raise a dissenting voice he was told his vote "didn't count".' Nice. Can we try that with Vermont in the Senate: 'you guys don't count.'

Via Drudge.

Ok, now the UN has gone too far.

Wasting my taxpayer dollars on their bureaucracy, promoting said bureaucracy as a viable force in the world, and generally being ineffectual yet at the same time a haven for dictators and murderers to legitimize themselves wasn't bad enough. Now, there is talk of the UN being in charge of the internet!!!!!! Clearly, we can't let this happen. Where do I enlist?

Geez, does this bother you as much as it does me?

Coca-Cola calls for industry effort on obesity

Ladies, it's not too late

Our favorite old guard socialist democrat is apparently still looking for Mrs. Right - er, left.

Not that we couldn't supply them up here in Seattle.

Friday, in the lobby of what turned out to be a fantastic talk by anti-war public scholar Tariq Ali, potential Mrs. Kuciniches came out in droves.

And based on their idealism, I don't think the "first lady" part would make a difference to them.

I'm known around here for my persistent tracking and categorization of the supporters of various candidates. Kerryites are angry but traditional: clean, power-hungry politics. Deaniacs are generally bouncy idealists who vacillate predictably between happy clear-eyed optimism about the future and rage about the powers of the present. Lieberman supporters are Republicans whose parents voted Democrat. And so forth.

But Kucinich supporters are a whole different breed.

Completely at home among the International Socialists, the Socialist Feminists, the Utah Coal Miners (don't ask, but they were selling Marx as well), and the Workers World Party, the Kucinich supporters are something more than political radicals.

They're dead serious. About EVERYTHING. And they tend to exist only in these narrow political spheres, like the University District.

And if you don't believe me and haven't done so yet, do check out the site. Submit your own entry, even!

After all, I hear he's got some serious spiritual energy.

"The energy of the stars becomes us. We become the energy of the stars. Stardust and spirit unite, and we begin: One with the universe. Whole and holy. From one source, endless creative energy, bursting forth, kinetic, elemental. We, the earth, air, water, and fire source of nearly 15 billion years of cosmic spiraling."

Unpatriotic?

Exactly who is lobbing that attack on who?

I know I've already asked, but....

could y'all please go vote for Dawn Summers in her pseudo category on the Wizbang poll. It will take you all of three seconds and I would really, really appreciate it because it would just mean less whining in my ear. Many thanks.

For the love of Mary....

Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeease stop this madness now. I don't want Eminem to rap about this on his next album (because he definitely will). I agree with this about his intention with the song.

It's a tough road to hoe out here

but somebody has to.

In the case of what the UW Young Democrats and others call "another racist bake sale," the issue is not, actually, racism. Nor is the issue even affirmative action. It is, plain and simple, freedom of speech.

A couple of months ago I posted on my own blog (archives protected right now) about the "Affirmative Action Bake Sale" held by the University of Washington College Republicans. Coverage of the story by the University's Daily and the Seattle Times, while biased, should at least back me up on what the actual events were.

Basically, the CRs set up a table selling cookies to different races for different prices, reflecting affirmative action policies. Why? Of course, to call attention to the issue. Of course, to visually demonstrate that race-based divisions should make people angry. Of course, to show how affirmative action perpetuates racism. Whether or not one believes affirmative action is a good policy, it is a race-based one, helping to perpetuate notions of inequality.

Students approached the table, began using racial slurs, and then violently tore it down, provoking action by the UWPD. As a result, the arrogant Daily asserted that the CRs attempts at bringing the issue up for discussion were "thinly disguised as a serious social commentary" and that the UWCRs had "decided to pick a fight with most of campus," assuming both that demonstration, when performed by the minority, is invalid commentary, and that most of campus is always on their side.

What's the result? Well, the CRs have debated affirmative action with the YDs. They've been trying to get equal treatment out of the Board of Regents. But what they haven't done is what the opposition wanted them to.

They haven't backed down.

Despite the campus' refusal to take their ideas seriously ("Perhaps they are doing this out of desperation (did we all see how badly they were beaten in the debate?), perhaps out of hatred or perhaps out of ignorance," say the Young Democrats), the CRs are coming back tomorrow to assert a fundamental right.

It's not even the right to pay the same for their cookies as everyone else, whether that's more or less (no, not all Republicans are white and male). It's not the right to make trouble. It's the right to freedom of speech that is granted every day to student organizations who can borrow microphones to scream their Bushphobias and opposition to higher tuition at the top of their lungs from in front of the student building. It's the right to freedom of speech that the Illuminati lady, for whom it's actually illegal to set up on the HUB lawn (the rest of us go through a process to actually register our organizations), asserts on a regular basis as she shoves conspiracy theories in the faces of passers-by. It's the right to freedom of speech that's used by LaRouche supporters on so many corners of campus on any given day. It's a right that's supposed to be universal.

And the UW College Republicans are standing up again to say that the right to free speech is not dependent on whether or not you like what they have to say.

Will the Democrats counter-demonstrate with free speech this time? Or will more violence be permitted, as last time the perpetrators were let go and the Republicans punished? How far will those who fear ideas that challenge them go to stop those ideas from being articulated (except in ways that they can limit and control, like private meetings)?

Tomorrow, we shall see.

Happy First Post Day to Me

I do have a real post on the way, but first I wanted to say hello, and thanks to K for letting me squat on her distinguished space. I will do my best to make my thoughts behave.

Post forthcoming in SECONDS. Aren't you excited.

New Guest Blogger!

We all know (and love) her from her site Five Corners of Oblivion and now Candace will be guest blogging over here at 'Spot On.' Please make her feel welcome and happy so that she will come back often. She tells me she will have a post up shortly.

Mark Steyn on Rowan Williams, the archbishop of Canterbury

Last month, the archbishop happened to be in Istanbul and was a guest at the home of the British consul, Roger Short. Within a few hours of his departure, Short was dead, vaporized in the wreckage of an almighty bombing. Williams sounded momentarily shaken, expressing ''shock and grief'' at the death of his host, and condemning ''these vicious and senseless attacks. These acts of violence achieve nothing.''

In fact, ''these acts of violence'' achieve quite a bit. Why, only a month earlier similar acts of violence had led the archbishop to make a speech at the Royal Institute for International Affairs at which he'd argued that terrorism can ''have serious moral goals.'' ''It is possible to use unspeakably wicked means to pursue -- an aim that is intelligible or desirable,'' he said. By ignoring this, America ''loses the power of self-criticism and becomes trapped in a self-referential morality.''

Perhaps Williams would like to explain what precisely is the ''serious moral goal'' of the men who killed his host.

One reason George W. Bush comes on a bit strong about ''evildoers'' and so forth is that the archbishop of Canterbury and any number of the Western world's great and good have rendered less primal language meaningless in this sphere: When Williams condemns terrorism as ''vicious and senseless,'' that's just the mood music of the evening news. When he says ''these acts of violence achieve nothing,'' what he means is that his ''shock'' stops at the end of the sound bite; whether or not the terrorists ''achieve nothing,'' he intends to do so.

I don't need to comment on this, there's a reason Mark Steyn is at the top of my list of favorite writers.

Howard Dean has a big mouth....

....and Lileks says that's a good thing for Republicans.

Via Hugh Hewitt.

Moralizing

I just clicked a link off of Dean Esmay's site and took a quiz about moralizing. These are my results:

Your Moralising Quotient is: 0.54.

Your Interference Factor is: 0.25.

Your Universalising Factor is: 0.50.

Your Moralising Quotient of 0.54 compares to an average Moralising Quotient of 0.29. This means that as far as the events depicted in the scenarios featured in this activity are concerned you are less permissive than average.

Your Interference Factor of 0.25 compares to an average Interference Factor of 0.16. This means that as far as the events depicted in the scenarios featured in this activity are concerned you are more likely to recommend societal interference in matters of moral wrongdoing, in the form of prevention or punishment, than average.

Your Universalising Factor of 0.50 compares to an average Universalising Factor of 0.46. This means you are more likely than average to see moral wrongdoing in universal terms - that is, without regard to prevailing cultural norms and social conventions (at least as far as the events depicted in the scenarios featured in this activity are concerned).



I was surprised by my results, I guess I didn't think I was all that judgemental when it comes to morality. I further didn't think I saw morality as a cultural manifestation. And I definitely didn't expect that I would think that morality should be imposed. Take the quiz and let me know how you do.

Definitely not a South Park Republican

Oschisms is real mad at Bush.

Hope for a free Iran.

My friend, and dedicated Iranian democracy activist, Banafsheh (scroll down to September 10th) sent me the above photo.

Leftists in need of lives

I love meetups. I love meeting new people and I like the social atmosphere at them since there are plenty of organized rightwing meetings all over the city already. I think I've covered that sufficiently on this site. It's once a week where I have a drink with people who aren't going to say 'but don't you seeeeee, Bush is so stoooooopid.' It's just a nice environment in a city that's unfriendly to my politics. The meetups I attend are the Republican Party one, the Bush2004 one and now the Townhall.com one.

A few months ago, I missed one of these meetups and got an email from a girl who said she had shown up but had been unable to find anyone. I emailed her back with my cell phone number and said she should call me if that happened again. The next upcoming meetup at the time was the Young Republican one, that is usually not very well attended. We decided to meet at that one.

I got there and found her right away at the bar. We were the only two people in attendance. We talked for awhile and hit it off quite well. She had started her own design website selling 'I heart GWB' t-shirts. She was just really cool and I was happy to have met her.

Then, two guys walked up and looked as if they were looking around. I asked if they were there for the meetup. They said they were. We grabbed a table with them and sat down. They were a little odd, both kind of smirking and one who was jerking around in his seat and kept jumping up and walking around. Still, anyone that knows me knows that I am nice to everyone. I would say that some of the biggest self-caused problems in my life have come from being waaaaaay too nice to people. I was once friendly to my Super, who had a spider tattoed on his neck, who came to fix my bathtub. He ended up emailing me and declaring love. Not good.

Anyway, it was an ok night. Not one of the better meetups but good anyway for the reasons mentioned above. Well, it turns out that that guys were 'undercover drunken operatives'. The girl from the meetup sent me this link about their mission. The piece starts out talking about fabulist Stephen Glass, which is fitting because, like Glass's work, it is also a work of fiction. Example? Turns out, I'm from the midwest! Who knew? They write, presumably about me since I went to the school they mention: One young Midwesterner had a cute anecdote about her disappointing arrival at Northeastern University as an undergraduate. She had come east to be around "aristocratic types," but found Boston to be full of nothing but "white trash." Among the other bombs that she had no remorse in dropping were, "I'm just proud that we have a President who wouldn't get a blow job in the oval office," and "I'm convinced that Eminem is really a Republican." In addition to my never even having been to the midwest, I would never use the kind of language they prescribe to me. While it's true that I believe Eminem is a Republican (I'll write it all out someday), the rest of the quote is a total lie. I don't care at all about Clinton's blowjobs in the Oval Office. There are so many other things to criticize him for that I never go there. I would also never talk about 'aristocratic types' (I'm not even sure I know what that means in the American context where the plumber could be a millionaire) or about 'white trash'. My experience in Boston was that it wasn't New York, that I couldn't go to bars like I did back home because they id everyone in that student infested city and that right before my college career began I fell in love with Scotland and spent the rest of my college time plotting how to return there (ultimately spending almost 3 out of 5 years there). The theme that we three (we were later joined by a friend of mine, commenter Bobm) aren't from NY (which we all actually are) runs throughout the piece. It's funny, the guy so wants to believe that there are no New York Republicans. What is he so scared of? He also writes that 'by the end of the night I'd questioned so many recent Republican decisions that only a contingent in dire need of heads would have trusted my elephantitus.' Well, guess what? I question a lot of Republican decisions. Even when it's a room full of real Republicans, we have plenty of disagreements about issues. Sorry, we're not sheep like the Democrats. We don't need to fit in or belong or make ourselves feel better about our lives by crashing your meetups. And I would never be mean or nasty to someone I was drinking with because of their opinions. I have openly Communist friends and have never treated them badly because of it. Sheesh, I'm friends with Kucinich-loving Dawn Summers.

I sent the guy an email and wrote that his life must be really sad that he feels the need to do things like this. I have no doubt that it is. I wish I could be meaner and harsher to people when I first meet them instead of trusting and open. Sorry, I guess I'm not 'aristocratic' (what I came 'east' looking for, after all) enough to act like you, Chris Fara, which is as loser-ish as can be.

UPDATE: he emailed me back and wrote (I swear, this couldn't be more classic):

I'm glad that we could both get a little publicity off of this (well - I was glad that I could - and I could deal with you having some shine if it's inevitable).

Of course he is. Why do it otherwise? His bio says (he actually uses the super corny '1' when he signs his email)

'Chris Fara1 has written for various underground hip-hop magazines, as well as some of the more audacious New York independents willing to publish his work. He can be reached at FARA1ANDONLY@netscape.net' which to me shouts 'hasn't been published anywhere worth mentioning' so clearly this little bit of publicity is something for him to be thankful for. You're welcome, Chris, it's the furthest you're ever going to get and it's the least we can do.

If I don't post it, I'll never hear the end of it

As you may know, I know Dawn Summers out there in 'real life'. This means she knows my phone number and knows where I live. This also means, that if I don't encourage you all to go vote for her blog, Clarified, in the Best Marauding Marsupial Ecosystem Level Blog Poll (yes, it seems to be a feel good category like 'best attendance' at school) over at Wizbang, I will have her on my phone line for the next week repeating some annoying phrase like 'didja encourage your readers to vote, didja encourage your readers to vote, didja encourage your readers to vote, didja encourage your readers to vote' over and over. So please do, for me if not for her. :-)

Anti-Semitism?

Ain't no such thing, says Noam Chomsky. Pejmanesque has more from the idiot darling of the unthinking Marxist set.

Via Instapundit

Someone please tell me....

.....what the hell is wrong with John Kerry.

Via Drudge Report.

Update: Instapundit has a great quip about the quickly sinking Kerry.

New Blog

One of my favorite recently made friends has started a blog. His first post is excellent, about the South Park Republican hoopla. He sums up my feelings on it perfectly.

The military life

The Mudville Gazette has a piece (from a few weeks ago but I only found it now) about families which serve in the military generation after generation. It's a great read and I highly recommend it. Toward the end I got to thinking about Dawn's post on fatherhood again. If the men in Mudville's post are the 'strong, silent' men that Dawn writes about, I think I know that these are the ones I prefer. There is something about dedication, honor and bravery that just does it for me when it comes to men. That doesn't mean that they need to be in a battlefield, it just means that these are the qualities I respect above others. I also realize that it's not really one or the other, that many people have a mix of the qualities Dawn prescribes to her two types of men. I'm just saying that these are the ones at the top of my list.

Why won't some people just fade away?

The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler fisks Jane Fonda's egotistical, fluff article. My favorite part is the opening line:

Jane: Before I turned sixty I thought I was a feminist.
Misha: And before I turned twenty, I knew that you were a skank, an idiot and a traitor. To this day, I still haven't quite figured out why the latter hasn't led to your dancing at the end of a nice, tough length of hemp, but maybe one day I'll understand. I doubt it, though.

More procrastinating

A liberal site, trying to be 'funny', lets you insert captions for Bush photographs.
I made acouple.

Discounts for Spot On readers from Spot On readers

Sephora.com between November 24 - December 7. 20% Friends & Family discount. Use discount code FF2003 at checkout on www.sephora.com

Banana Republic between December 5 - December 7, 2003. 25% discount at a store (regular and sale) Coupon code is BRFRIEND

Old Navy between December 1-December 7, 2003. 20% discount online or at a store (both regular and sale merchandise). Coupon code is 68FDCBNSBG

GAP between December 4- December 7, 2003. 25% discount online or at a store (both regular and sale merchandise). Coupon Code is 9MHD8FG85M

Lacoste between December 3-December7, 2003. 25% discount at any Lacoste boutique.

Courtesy of Spot On reader SMFA.

DK Intimates Sample Sale, 136 Madison Avenue, 10th floor. December 9th, 10th and 11th, 10am-6pm.

Courtesy of Spot on reader Jessica.

LATEST UPDATE: Macy's Friends and Family Discount, December 4th-7th. Click here to print coupon.

Courtesy of Spot On reader Michael D.

And this is potentially the Democrat's nominee for president

From Charles Krauthhamer in an article titled 'Bush Derangement Syndrome':

Diane Rehm: ``Why do you think he (Bush) is suppressing that (Sept. 11) report?''

Howard Dean: ``I don't know. There are many theories about it. The most interesting theory that I've heard so far -- which is nothing more than a theory, it can't be proved -- is that he was warned ahead of time by the Saudis. Now who knows what the real situation is?''

-- ``Diane Rehm Show,'' NPR, Dec. 1

Via Free Republic.

What I get awoken to most days

Dawn Summers (very loudly into the phone): Did you know Bush has a death stare!?!?

Me: Hmm, really.

Dawn: Do you know what this means?

Me (dozing off back to sleep): No, what?

Dawn: That he's not stupid! Stupid people don't have death stares! They don't know what's going on around them enough to have a death stare!

Me: Yeah, that's really shocking. So then he must be evil, right?

Dawn: Exactly! He's evil, not stupid!

Me (yawwwwwwwn): I can't believe you woke me up for this.

Um....

....I'm not sure I understand this story. Can someone explain it to me?

From the Note:

The Hill's Jonathan Kaplan reports on the bad blood between GOP lawmakers and party leaders, stemming from the Iraq reconstruction bill and the Medicare legislation. President Bush became personally involved in the internal battle while lobbying Congress on the Medicare bill:

"Well-placed sources said Bush hung up on freshman Rep. Tom Feeney after Feeney said he couldn't support the Medicare bill. The House passed it by only two votes after Hastert kept the roll-call vote open for an unprecedented stretch of nearly three hours in the middle of the night.

Feeney, a former Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives whom many see as a rising star in the party, reportedly told Bush: "I came here to cut entitlements, not grow them."

Sources said Bush shot back, 'Me too, pal,' and hung up the phone."

A lesson about jumping to conclusions

Did you all hear the story about the woman trampled at Walmart? Everyone was all over it. What did it say about our culture, people asked, as hands wringed. Turns out the message about our culture was entirely different than it seemed.

One of those 'procrastinating on doing my work' posts

Did you know that Eminem travels with a body double nicknamed Partial (Em's real name is Marshall, see)? It's true. It's just one of the things you can learn while wasting time watching 'Fabulous Life of....' on MTV.

And while we're on the topic of what is on my tv, is there anything worse than those Disarrono commercials where the woman is flirting with the bartender and then actually takes an ice cube out of the glass and rubs it against herself? I mean, really.

Perhaps affirmative action for women can end now?

More women hold Fortune 500 board seats

Female Med School Applicants Surpass Men

On Clark

My goodness, is Matt Taibbi ever an idiot, and the NY Press has slumped into mediocrity so fast after Russ Smith sold it that it hurts even my hard heart. Nevertheless, Taibbi has a really interesting piece on Clark in, of all places, the Nation. The opening line, about Clark's blank, unblinking eyes, is dead on:

You can see something in the eyes of most all the Democratic candidates: the pugnacity of Howard Dean, the idealism of Dennis Kucinich, even (surprisingly) the elaborate sense of humor just under the surface of Joe Lieberman.

Not Wesley Clark. His eyes are blank. Like a turtle resting on a rock in the middle of a pond, he simply seems never to move, no matter how long you stare.

The rest of the piece has some really funny moments as well (such as when he tells people at the Clark meetup that he is a porn director). Worth a read.

Sniffle, sniffle

Dawn Summers has a really nice post about fatherhood.

A blatant trampling of First Amendment rights...

....by Mickey Kaus. Ken Wheaton tells the shocking story. At this point, we may as well be putting the Bill of Rights through a shredder.

Grasping

How do you know the left has completely and totally lost the plot? Well, one way is to read the remarkable spin going on regarding Bush's trip to Iraq. First, one dimwit from Counterpunch couldn't figure out the whole time change thing and ended up arguing that Bush had forced the soldiers to be awoken at dawn to have dinner. How complicated could it be to see that if you are watching the president in the US in the A.M, it's P.M in Baghdad. But Bush is the stooooopid one, of course.

Then, Instapundit picks up a story from the Washington Post that says that Bush never actually served the turkey, that 'Bush picked up a decoration, not a serving plate'. Oh but lookey here and here. That seems to be turkey the president is serving. Shocking, that.

I'm feeling better about the 2004 election these days. I still think its going to be tight (yes, that's right Doug, I don't think Bush is taking New York) but liberals have just driven over the cliff and don't even realize it. My favorite liberal argument (well, second favorite to 'you're racist!') is 'don't you seeeeeeeeee?' They seem to have decided that that is the one that works best for them (though, again, I do miss being called racist when I said I wasn't a fan of homeless people peeing on my building or when I say that minorities are just as good as white people and shouldn't get preferential treatment) and they will continue to wail 'don't you seeeeee, he made the military get up at dawn to have dinner, he's evil' or 'don't you seeeeee, nobody ate any turkey, it was all a sham' up until November 2004. And this brings me great happiness.

Instapundit has a lot more on the turkey lunacy.

Spinning Republicanism

I'm sorry, but articles like this and clothes like this annoy me. I realize that the Republicans have a big tent these days, and, don't get me wrong, I like that very much, but I hate this need to spin being a Republican because you've been trained to think its not cool. Like 'I like low taxes but I'm not into blue blazers.' What do these two things have in common? Who told these people that there is only one way to be a Republican, that there is a certain way to dress or talk? It's all so corny. I guess I like that being a Republican has become something 'cooler' than it used to be, but I didn't need for that to happen in order to consider myself a Republican. I'm just worried about those among us who did.

I don't know why I'm so fascinated with rap lately....

....but I love that Obie Trice song 'got no teeth', I've been dancing around my apartment to it all morning.

No more UN!

Jonah Goldberg makes a very reasonable case for scrapping the UN and replacing it with a League of Democracies. I'm in.

I don't blame them.

From the American Spectator:

LEFTOVERS
While President George W. Bush was embraced warmly by the more than 600 troops he served dinner to in Baghdad on Thanksgiving, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton didn't get the same treatment.

"To these men and women over here, it is the same thing," says the U.S. official. "Her husband didn't get it and she obviously hasn't learned. These men and women over here are America. They are the policy. For her to say what she said was just misguided."

Via Polipundit.

Have you....

.....checked out Peter's new satire site? While it's true that the boy needs a third blog like he more cds, it's still a pretty funny site. Check it out.

I am obsessed....

....with the Japanese store Takashimaya. And since I can't afford to even drink tea there, let alone buy any of their products, I'm falling in love with ebay all over again.

Some recent purchases and bids:

A choker that I just love and wear often (you can see me wearing it in some of the pictures from the last Republican Party Meetup here.

A scarf which I haven't received yet.

A purse that I just bid on.

I have a bunch of other useless but pretty stuff from Takashimaya, including a Japanese warrior scarf that I've always wanted to hang on my wall but is currently in one of my closets and also a scrap book that is too pretty to write in or touch and so goes unused.

P.S Guess who is procrastinating on writing a paper by giving you all the details of my latest shopping obsession?

The legal problem with gay marriage

It was bound to happen.

Yet another meetup.com post

Tonight, Tuesday, there is a townhall.com meetup. So far, it is the biggest rightwing meetup around with 70 people RSVP'd to attend. It will be at the Manhattan Lounge at 1720 2nd Ave between East 89th+90th at 7pm. I just came back from grabbing a drink there with Peter. Nice place with a really friendly owner. I'm looking forward to drinking there with rightwingers.

Other meetups coming up:

Bush2004 Meetup on December 9th-voting on a location is still going on but the Auction House bar on 300 East 89th Street between First and Second Avenues is far in the lead.

Republican Party Meetup on December 18th-Voting is still going on but again, Auction House is in the lead.

Smaller meetups include:

The Young Republican one on December 16th and the conservative one on December 17th.

Meetups happen all over the country. I've found them to be fun and energizing. If you're looking to get a meetup started in your area, drop me an email and I'll see if I can be of assistance.

For other NYC right-leaning events, visit the New York Young Republican Blog. Ron Lewenberg will be taking over as editor shortly. If you have events in NY to promote, please email them to him at nyyrcblog@yahoo.com.

Ouch.

From the Note (which, clearly, I missed very much while it was on hiatus) on Dennis Kucinich:

'Is he electable?' said Ohio State University political science professor Herb Weisberg. 'Not unless he's away from Washington, D.C., on a day that a nuclear attack wipes out everyone else in government — and even then he would be carrying the wrong message to win.'"

Have to agree with the Note on this:

Speaking of the State of the Union, that will be a good time for the president and the nation to review how he is doing on his core campaign promises. Sure, his critics might quibble about whether the "done" things are actually "done," but, as POTUS talking points, what is done is done.

Done: education reform, tax cuts, Medicare reform, a prescription drug benefit, vast increases in military spending, restoring honor and dignity to the Oval Office

Pending: Social Security reform, tort reform, energy policy

Not so much: a changed tone in Washington, a humble foreign policy, reduction in the size of the federal government

Although, my own note is that of the things President Bush hasn't done, only the last one matters to me. As for 'humble foreign policy', in the words of the dead rapper Biggie Smalls: things done change.

Oops

The League of Liberals get caught cheatin'. How utterly sad.