November 18, 2007
Can We Just All Make an Agreement
Not to
talk about our exes on our blogs, unless we preserve their anonymity, as I used to do over at
Dean's place? (Such as
here, and
here. And
here.)
The fact is, I really like my exes. Even the quirky, annoying one, whom I can only take in small doses. I like 'em all, except the Westwood Village denizen who took my virginity by force. That was not too cool.
Now, do I now question what on earth I was thinking, with one or two of these people? Sure. But that has to do with compatibility issues. I hope they are all doing well. Even Mr. Westwood Village, for that matter; he was a bit out of his depth with me, after all. I never want to speak with him again, but I do pray for him, every now and then.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
02:55 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 156 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Atila,
does anybody come to your blog anymore?
Or is this election getting you down no more Bush on the ballot
Posted by: azmat hussain at November 18, 2007 05:42 PM (mdszq)
2
Well, I'm despondent, of course. It's certainly no secret that I feel G.W. is perfect, and has handled his administration flawlessly.
I'm starting to come to terms with the possibility that I may never have his baby, but I still have crying jags here and there. Once in a while I sleep all day, wake up at 5:00 p.m., and stumble to my "W" corner to stare at all the pictures I have up of him, along with various White House curios and cheap souvenirs I got in Texas.
But I feel that I can probably cope. I may
not take my life right away—that is, as long as I can hold out the hope that someday, somehow, his younger brother will run. And then, of course, his nephew (in a few more years).
I never thought you'd be the type to kick a girl when she's down, Azmat.
Posted by: Attila Girl at November 18, 2007 06:49 PM (aywD+)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
"Any Statist, 2008"
I don't think I've ever been made fun of quite
this elegantly.
(The next post down is where the Cat and I have been having our debate about Terrorism vs. the Economy as the main challenge of this day and age.)
For the record, I do agree with Ben Franklin about how it isn't a hot idea to give up liberty for safety. And, in fact, that is why McCain ranks so low on my list—and why, despite my admiration for his gender-bending, Giuliani has so many question marks next to his name (and it isn't just gun rights that Rudy is weak on: there were all kinds of infringements on civil liberties when he was mayor of NYC, and seeing that expanded to the Federal level—when the Feds aren't bastions of restraint, even now—certainly gives one pause.
So, yes. I'm over my crush on Giuliani.)
Posted by: Attila Girl at
02:35 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 152 words, total size 1 kb.
1
And what personal liberties do you expect to gain if Hillary is elected ? It would be unspeakable if she was to win.
The election is still 11 and 1/2 months away and I still haven't decided on a candidate, but the alternative an alternative doesn't exist.
Posted by: Mark at November 18, 2007 04:19 PM (d/RyS)
2
Oh I wasn't making fun of you specifically. I'm just getting awfully anxious about the fact that he seems to be getting so much traction in a party that historically stands against so much of what he is for.
Posted by: Desert Cat at November 18, 2007 09:13 PM (DIr0W)
3
Oh. So it isn't all about me? Are you
sure?
That's okay. I guess . . .
Posted by: Attila Girl at November 18, 2007 10:41 PM (aywD+)
4
Of course, the quote is usually bastardized as "Those who would sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither" or some such, when the actual quote, (which Franklin denied writing, btw) was "Those who would give up ESSENTIAL LIBERTY to purchase a little TEMPORARY SAFETY, deserve neither LIBERTY nor SAFETY." There is always a tension between the twin roles of the government as the protector of individual liberties and the government as protector against foreign/domestic aggression. There have always been trade-offs between rights and security. I am personally not particularly impressed at the people who are screaming that the sky is falling because the NSA satellites are monitoring all our phone calls and taking naughty pictures of us in the shower (although if any NSA types happen to have any candids of that cute red-head down the road, drop me a line). I do not really see our basic constitutional rights being rolled back by the Bush administration as a prelude to a theocracy. Of course, I was taken to Gitmo to be questioned, but I pegged their caucasian-o-meter, so they had to let me go, so maybe I am the wrong person to be asking about that.
David
Posted by: David Harr at November 19, 2007 05:32 PM (qaYe1)
5
Bush didn't do much to roll back civil liberties; most of that has been accomplished by the gun-grabbers and the drugophobes. And it's been going on for a long time.
Asset forfeiture for drug dealers being one of the worst examples: it's an engraved invitation for abuse of power by/corruption of public officials at the municipal, county and state level.
Posted by: Attila Girl at November 19, 2007 10:34 PM (B5tPZ)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
November 17, 2007
"I Don't Care What You Say!"
"The middle class is getting squeezed, and the glass is
half empty. La la la la la! I can't
hear you!"
Apologies all around. But, food for thought, no?
Posted by: Attila Girl at
10:52 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 41 words, total size 1 kb.
"Did You See That Story?"
"Right—the one about protagonists, and gray hair."
At writers' group they are discussing the fact that some novelists are creating more story lines that feature heroes and heroines over 50.
"Because most readers are over 50 now. Isn't that sad?"
"That's so sad."
"Um." I find myself speaking again, something I try not to do at writers' group when I'm not actually reading my work. "How is this sad? People are living longer. We're not dying as young. Why does this depress you?"
"Because," one of them explains, "it means that young people don't really read any more."
"Um, no. It means that there aren't as many of them in this country as there are middle-aged folks."
They look at me, and I realize that they are completely unaware of the broader demographic trends that underlie the statistics they're quoting. And, once more, I shut up and let them play "ain't it awful." But it's boring.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
10:41 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 166 words, total size 1 kb.
There's an Intersting Discussion About Health Care . . .
going on over at
James' place.
My favorite part is Dave's demolishing of the "left/right" construct. Always annoying, those labels.
(Note to self: decide on this blog's style for "health care" vs. "healthcare." And, for crying out loud, pick the latter.
"The cobbler's children have no shoes." To my shame, it's been four and a half years—but I still don't have a style sheet for this site.
I must go now and hit myself over the head with The Chicago Manual of Style, or perhaps Words Into Type. Or maybe Web 11.
Your average proofreader sure knows how to have fun on a Saturday night. Yesirree.)
Posted by: Attila Girl at
10:22 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 126 words, total size 1 kb.
Well. Nice To Be Famous, However Briefly.
So they are "bloggers," and I am only
an "L.A.-area blogger." Just a local chick who drove up for the event in her bitchin' PT Cruiser. Oh, the shame of it. Did anyone ever abuse
Moxie so? Of course not: after all, she's blonde.
FWIW, I did ask the Big Dawgs for advice on improving my traffic. Rusty suggested that "sometimes the shallowest posts bring in the most hits," and you could never go wrong by posting pics of girls in lingerie. Ace told me that the fastest—if not quite the classiest—way to get traffic was to blog about how hard it was to find a bra that was the right size for one's ample breasts. When I told him I was okay now that my local Nordstrom had a new buyer, he looked at me funny. After that, he spoke more slowly, and a bit more loudly. And he used shorter words.
Finally, I asked Jeff. I was sort of expecting him to discuss some part of my body about which I should do some real in-depth/hard-hitting reporting—and I think I arched my back, just to be safe—but he merely enquired as to whether his pecs had met my expectations.
"Well, you're wearing a T-shirt with sleeves," I responded irritably. "So I can't see them as well as I might. But if you must know, the biceps pass. Get me another Bloody Mary, willya? Put it on Rusty's tab. Or your wife's." After that, I kind of stewed in a corner for a while, muttering under my breath, and then I went upstairs to write neo-feminist screeds in defense of manhaters.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
12:18 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 286 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Pics of girls in lingerie always catch my eye...but really I stay for those hard hitting posts.
Posted by: Mr. Matamoros at November 17, 2007 11:37 AM (FODlD)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
November 16, 2007
Fred on "Amnesty"
I'll send you to
Sean's site; last time I was at
Fred's place the video started automatically, and I'm still traumatized from the experience. (I have a delicate constitution.)
Blah, blah, blah. I wasn't so much listening to what he said as admiring the extras on the set he uses. I really dig the artifice of it: how the people in this old-fashioned coffee shop ignore the guy in the makeup under the bright lights and pretending to go about their own conversations.
It's so fake, and yet so well-done that I want to vote for him now!
Um, yes. I did grow up near Disneyland. Just like Zonker. And . . .?
Posted by: Attila Girl at
11:13 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 119 words, total size 1 kb.
November 15, 2007
The Fun Never Stops.
Another installment from
The Codependency Chronicles:
When I left my mother's house yesterday I'd hauled most of the recycleables out to the bin, but left a small pile of them there. With the mom urging me to take off and avoid the rush-hour traffic (it was too late anyway, it turns out), I extracted a promise that she'd do it herself, pronto.
After all, the last thing either of us wanted was to have Mandy tear all the plastic, cardboard and whatnot into itty-bitty pieces and strew them all over the place—necessitating yet one more round of picking up the debris by hand, and then running the vacuum.
And yet, that's exactly what had happened when I got there this afternoon. The dog had also opened an entire bag of potting soil onto the living room carpet, and spread it around. Furthermore, it was a hot day: the place smelled like mouse piss.
(A couple of months ago my mother informed me that there was a mouse in her house. Though was a biology major, and had studied genetics at the graduate level at UCLA, she apparently failed to anticipate what happens when there is a little rodent around, and it manages to find even one friend. And, no: when I showed up with traps a few months ago, she wouldn't allow me to set one of them for her, and come back later for the little mousie corpse. She was going to do it herself. So now I'm doing it, but I need to set many. Unless Cougar Boy takes care of it tomorrow, and gets to rediscover that when mom gets tense, 90% of what one does is wrong. And not just a little bit wrong. Desperately, irrevocably, irretrievably wrong!)
I wasn't particularly happy to see my accomplishments of the previous two days undone, but I got to work cleaning, dusting, straightening, and hauling things around. A few times I asked my mother to get me a beer—which didn't seem unreasonable, in all that heat. (No, I didn't want to turn on the AC. I was trying to air the place out. Did I specify that I'm crazy and codependent?)
But of course the trick with clutterers is that one cannot either (1) touch their things, or (2) ask them to make a decision about the disposition of any of their possessions.
At one point she saw me picking up the second half of a broken chair and taking it toward the garage. "What in the name of God are you doing?" she shrieked.
Ah, my mother. The woman I grew up with, in those bracing pre-Prozac days. How nice to have her back. Really: just like being a teenager again. Without the acne.
"Well," I responded, "due to the fact that it's broken, I was going to take it to the garage. But I won't do that if you want it here in your breakfast nook."
"I want it here," she told me.
"Sure thing. Do you just want this part, or do you want the broken-off seat?"
"I want both parts of it here."
Personally, I think she was confusing me with the dog again, and had just read somewhere about the importance of establishing that one is the "alpha."
A few minutes later I cornered her in the kitchen. "You know," I explained, "I understand that I'm not allowed to throw things away without permission. But not being able to put broken things in the garage without permission is quite a handicap."
"Listen," she replied. "I don't want to discuss this kind of thing with you unless you can get to a better mental place."
I"m working on that right now, eight hours later. The better mental place thing. I took double the normal dosage of Ambien, because the mental place I want to be is unconsciousness. With any luck I'll soon slip away to a happy land in which everyone can be an orphan, with a little hard work and determination . . .
Posted by: Attila Girl at
10:51 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 678 words, total size 4 kb.
1
Let me make sure I'm getting this right-- in your view, the smell of mouse piss is a _bad_ thing? Hell no. It smells like...victory.
Posted by: Prof. Purkinje at November 16, 2007 04:40 AM (T742U)
2
Frazzled, I'd say.
But all thses things, put together, do allow offspring to feel superior, no? Another gift from Mom.
Posted by: Darrell at November 16, 2007 10:03 AM (J805E)
3
Prof, I doubt you've ever had it amplified by the sunlight in your lab. Of course, your point is well-taken: some of us get less exposure to mouse piss than others, and I'll have to take my hat off to you in that regard.
Though once we found that little dead mouse I hoped that had been part of the smell problem--alas, it was in a different room.
Posted by: Attila Girl at November 16, 2007 11:15 AM (aywD+)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Who Knew that Olympia
. . . was such a
hotbed of activism? I'm gonna grab my tie-dye and go!
Hat-tip to Ace's crew.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
11:32 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 28 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Stopping shipments through the port to Fort Lewis--kids as human shields.
http://videos.theolympian.com/vmix_hosted_apps/p/media?id=1562999
And they are demanding taxpayer-funded counseling for the trauma they suffered. Yep, The Left Coast, indeed.
Posted by: Darrell at November 16, 2007 03:05 PM (J805E)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
No Getting Directions Today.
MapQuest is beta-ing some lame new dysfunctional site. Google Maps keeps locking up on me ("did you mean that address in California?" "Well, didja?"). And Yahoo won't work at all—presumably because it won't give me directions until I log in. Very creepy.
I might have to resort to looking at one of those large dead-tree things.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
11:09 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 64 words, total size 1 kb.
Ronnie's Jeep.
And some blogger.

This is at the Reagan Ranch Center in downtown Santa Barbara, which is run by the excellent Young America's Foundation. It's partly a museum, and it houses some archival materials from the Ranch itself. It also contains a small theater in which footage of Reagan's speeches can be viewed.
The small-but-growing library encompasses all the ideas commonly labeled conservative ("from Ayn Rand to Dinesh D'Souza," as our gracious guide, Bryant Conger of the local staff, put it). And YAF will be installing a bookstore soon. The library is not for archival purposes, of course—there's something-or-other in Simi Valley that handles that task—but rather a working library that will ensure the students who attend workshops, events, and classes at the Center will be able to access ideas that their high schools and universities may have, um, forgotten to let them in on.
The main feature in the entrance is a piece of the Berlin wall (from the colorful, graffitti'd Western side, of course), framed by the Pink Floyd Ronald Reagan quote, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall."
The most important room in the Center is the classroom. YAF takes a lot of its educational work "on the road" to campuses throughout the country, but it now has a facility in Santa Barbara that makes larger-scale conservative functions affordable to those who live in the Western states on a shoestring (such as mendicant bloggers and, much more importantly, college students).
The entire installation is run, by the way, with private funds only, with no corners cut—or even rounded off a little. (Really: don't get me started on what a class act YAF is—from hosting bloggers at the Leadership Conference to the quality of the banquet food at its events. I've attended a lot of entertainment industry functions, and the catering at the YAF banquets was a step above what I've had at any of those dinners in Manhattan or Beverly Hills. [Blogging ethics standard disclaimer: I ate the food. But only enough to verify that it was up to my foodie standards.])
Naturally, there was no general agreement from Conference attendees about such things as the relationship between Church and State, or on what Reagan's legacy might be beyond the liberation of millions of people from totalitarianism. That's all to the good: Classical Liberalism (that is, conservatism) is about the free exchange of ideas. Open dialogue.
So why does YAF use Reagan's legacy—the preservation of the Ranch and the installation of the nearby Center—as a jumping-off point for promoting conservative ideals? Because, like Abraham Lincoln, Reagan got lots of things wrong, and got the most important thing very, very right. In fact, the thing they both got right was the very same thing.
Slavery is wrong, whether it is perpetrated by private individuals, or by the State.
Thanks once more to Jason Mattera of YAF's national team for putting together some of the media outreach at this rather extraordinary event.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
10:05 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 475 words, total size 3 kb.
1
I read this paragraph fully about the difference of most up-to-date and previous technologies, it's awesome article.
Posted by: jfhds.Com at January 28, 2013 02:49 AM (jLnXH)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
November 14, 2007
Camille Paglia Is a Stud/God.
(Hey! What did I say? Stop
looking at me like that!)
Her latest bitchfest in Salon is incredible. On Hillary Clinton:
Hillary seems to have acolytes rather than friends -- hardly a reassuring trait for a potential president whose paranoia has already been called Nixonian. Isolated monarchs never hear the bad news until the people riot and the lynch mob is at the door.
And on the paucity of good female candidates for President:
I have repeatedly said that Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California should have been the first woman president. With all due respect to Salon's perspicacious Glenn Greenwald, whose hard-hitting columns on Feinstein as a Beltway politician have been must-reads, Feinstein's statewide and national popularity are mainly due to her unflappable performances on television as a shrewd, steady, articulate public servant, deeply informed about military matters. She handles and deflects media queries with silky ease. Exuding both authority and compassion, she has true gravitas -- a rare quality in women. Dianne Feinstein, not Hillary Clinton, has already created the paradigm for a female commander in chief.
Well, except for that whole "I want to ban guns that look scary" campaign. And the "here, Mr. Serial Killer! We know what your tennis shoes look like, so you might want to dump them in the Bay!" escapade. And, of course, that awkward moment during the Milk murder. Other than those itty bitty problems, Feinstein is just terrific. I would definitely nominate her for Gun-Grabber in Chief, or Investigation Botcher in Chief, if we had such titles.
As far as I'm concerned, the archtypal female CiC remains Condi Rice. Hillary might have been fine in terms of her presentation skills (which, of course, is a big stumbling block for Paglia), but my problem is that ever since she got her face botoxed Hillary can't really show emotion (except by popping her eyes out), and I want someone in the Oval Office who's going to scare the shit out of our enemies. (Yup. We have 'em. Sorry to break it to you.) I don't care so much whether it's a man, or a woman, or . . . what was that other sex? I'm getting very absent-minded in my old age.
We've had some bitchin' female heads of state throughout history. It's simply an accident that we haven't had one in this particular country quite yet. But there's no rush, for it will certainly happen at some point.
And here's Camille on the environment:
This facile attribution of climate change to human agency is an act of hubris. Good stewardship of the environment is an ethical imperative for every nation. But breast-beating hysteria merely betrays impious tunnel vision. Thousands of factors, minute and grand, are at work in cyclic climate change, whose long-term outcomes we cannot possibly predict. Nature should inspire us with awe, not pity.
I probably don't read Paglia enough, because 1) her blindness about the War on Terror is irritating, given that this is the primary challenge we face today, and 2) I have an old-fashioned feminist streak in me that once in a while gets hit crosswise with her swashbuckling PI rhetoric.
But the important thing about Paglia is this: she writes what she thinks, notwithstanding how her homies are going to feel about it. Truth trumps diplomacy, every time.
It's an enchanting quality, and a rare one. It's the same reason I adore Christopher Hitchens, with whom I agree on very little.
Read Paglia's whole essay, though: as a special bonus, she wrote silly apologetics about the morally/intellectually bankrupt Norman Mailer, and they made me giggle.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
10:49 PM
| Comments (17)
| Add Comment
Post contains 609 words, total size 4 kb.
1
her blindness about the War on Terror is irritating, given that this is the primary challenge we face today
You really believe that?
I rather think the collapsing dollar, soaring energy, food and commodity prices, an acute housing market crisis, a credit crisis that is largely being papered over by the Fed, a southern border being overrun by illegals, all rank a tad higher in terms of the total number of Americans potentially adversely affected, than the chances of another third-world camel-humper crashing another plane into a building and killing a few people.
Anyway, you ought to know you can't win a War on Terror any more than you can win a War on Poverty or a War on Drugs or any other war on an abstract notion. You win wars against Germans or Japanese or Viet-Cong (had we the balls to see it through) or Baathist madmen or even Al Qaida cells.
Terrorism is a method. The "War on Terror" is a war on a method, which is absurd, and as doomed to failure as the "War on Poverty" (war on a human condition) or the "War on Drugs" (which is really a war on the citizenry).
Not that this bothers those pushing this line of absurdity any. Because this and the other wars on abstractions serve to turn decent freedom loving conservatives into authoritarian party-liners. And I've decided I've had quite enough of that.
Posted by: Desert Cat at November 15, 2007 08:19 PM (DIr0W)
2
1) Okay: War on Islamo-fascists. Better? Or do you need for me to list specific state sponsors?
2) One other little point: the events of 9/11 did not help the U.S. economy. Not even a little.
3) And I have seen higher energy prices--I was around in the 1970s.
4) Sell me on the "credit crisis." It seems to me that fewer people will become homeowners in the most popular areas of the country, and more people will be paying cash for a lot of their purchases--which might not be a bad thing.
I mean, your point is taken about the potential reach of the "camel-humpers," on a certain level. But some of 'em have computers, now, and they are constantly finding new ways to reach out and decapitate someone . . . so, yeah. I think the economy can sort itself out if we keep taxes low--but bright, creative guys with Saudi dollars, twisted morals, a death wish, and plenty of time on their hands make me nervous.
Posted by: Attila Girl at November 15, 2007 10:08 PM (aywD+)
3
Funny when we have a war on terror, or a war on fascism, or a war on piracy we can find targets to put in our sights. If Bush would have said "War on al Qaeda." critics would have said "What about..."
Armed Islamic Group (GIA)
Abu Sayyaf
Aden-Abyan Islamic Army (Yemen)
The Salafist Group for Call and Combat (GSPC)
Adolat - Uzbekistan
Akromiya - Uzbekistan
Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya
Abu Nidal[2]
Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades[2]
Black Hand (Palestine)[2]
Black September (group)[2]
Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP)[2]
Fatah Hawks
Force 17
Hamas -
Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP)
Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC)
Popular Resistance Committees
Palestinian Islamic Jihad Movement
Palestine Liberation Front
Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)
Manuel Rodriguez Patriotic Front (FPMR)
Babbar Khalsa
Bhinderanwala Tiger Force of Khalistan
International Sikh Youth Federation
Dashmesh Regiment
Khalistan Commando Force
Khalistan Liberation Force
Khalistan Liberation Front
Khalistan National Army
Khalistan Zindabad Force
Saheed Khalsa Force
Al-Barakaat (Al-Qaida front)
Al-Wafa Humanitarian Organization (Al-Qaida front)
Benevolence International Foundation (Al-Qaida front)
Global Relief Foundation (Al-Qaida front)
Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (Hamas)
Konsojaya Trading Company (Jemaah Islamiyah front)
God's Army
Nagaland Rebels
National Democratic Front of Bodoland
Irish National Liberation Army
Irish Republican Army
Ulster Volunteer Force
Ulster Defence Association
Barisan Merah Putih
Laskar Jihad
Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam
Anti-State Justice
Black Star
Conscientious Arsonists
The Angry Brigade
New Revolutionary Alternative
Squamish Five
Shining Path
Túpac Amaru Revolutionary Movement (MRTA)
Animal Liberation Front (ALF)
Environmental Life Force
and hundreds more.
"War on Terror" makes the point.
Posted by: Darrell at November 16, 2007 10:37 AM (J805E)
4
So are we at war against all of those organizations who happen to be using terrorism as one of their tactics? Do we have troops in the field confronting all of them?
Is it really our job to be the world's policeman?
Posted by: Desert Cat at November 16, 2007 11:01 AM (B2X7i)
5
I've got more
here, since my previous post was rejected.
Posted by: Desert Cat at November 16, 2007 11:03 AM (B2X7i)
6
Yes. We are at war with all terrorists groups and those governments that fund, supply, shelter, and direct these groups for their own surrogate interests. We must to protect US interests and US citizens wherever they may be found. Our nation said "enough is enough" shortly after 9/11.
NINJA loans. . . No income, no job, no assets, no problem! Who could have guessed they would ever be a problem? Who encouraged such programs and held the simitar of prosecution over those who wouldn't? Hmmm. Count me in to help all those involved in those transactions.
And ditto helping those that were flipping houses to make a profit. As soon as I get help for all my bad investments/decisions I ever made(Wanna buy a Nagel serigraph, anyone?). The market will work it out, it always does. Something tells me that people will need houses in the years to come.
Posted by: Darrell at November 16, 2007 02:07 PM (J805E)
7
Or scimitars of of prosecution, even!
Posted by: Darrell at November 16, 2007 02:55 PM (J805E)
8
Well count on me to write what I think too then. BTW I have a couple of economic indicator charts posted in reply to #2.
Posted by: Desert Cat at November 16, 2007 07:45 PM (DIr0W)
9
In re: your comment about offshore manufacturing, I'm all for letting natural market forces sort out the cheapest way to produce products.
But my specific comment was in regards to the Chinese practice of pegging their currency to the dollar. That is an *artificial* constraint that gives their economy a decided advantage against the US economy for those production decisions. And that isn't the only thing they do. They heavily subsidize their shipping industry by way of a banking trick that underwrites the construction of shipping containers by overvaluing the empty containers stacking up on US shores. Somehow their "cost" for producing a shipping container is no more than the *scrap value of the steel* it is composed of! Highly dubious.
And there are doubtless more such cards up their sleeve that all add up to unfair trade practices.
I'm all for free trade. But for free trade to work properly, this sort of gaming can't be part of the market equation.
Posted by: Desert Cat at November 16, 2007 08:13 PM (DIr0W)
10
It sounds like you're talking about the Canadians WRT the entertainment industry.
Posted by: Attila Girl at November 16, 2007 09:29 PM (ADTKa)
11
No income, no job, no assets, no problem! Who could have guessed they would ever be a problem? Who encouraged such programs and held the simitar of prosecution over those who wouldn't? Hmmm. Count me in to help all those involved in those transactions.
You're already in, whether you want to be or not, thanks to the Fed. They've decided to inflate their way out of this mess, and that affects everyone, not just the stupid mortgage companies and stupid homebuyers at fault.
Posted by: Desert Cat at November 18, 2007 08:40 PM (DIr0W)
12
Yes. We are at war with all terrorists groups and those governments that fund, supply, shelter, and direct these groups for their own surrogate interests.
Tell me then Darrell, where does the US stack up in that list when were funding and supplying the Mujahideen fighting their guerilla/terrorist war against the Soviets in Afghanistan? Or how about when we encouraged the Shiites and Kurds to rise up against Saddam? What was the Bay of Pigs about? Or for that matter the installation of Salvador Allende in Chile or the Shah in Iran?
But of course! You see it's all perfectly okay when the good ole US does it to protect our own interests, isn't it? (And I'm not saying there weren't good reasons for many of the above actions.) It seems to me that other groups, peoples and nations might see it similarly. And that an awful lot of hubris can be masked by such a Righteous and Noble War.
It is worth examining what is really going on and in whose interests it really is.
Posted by: Desert Cat at November 18, 2007 10:32 PM (DIr0W)
13
*urk* I mean the *deposition* of Allende.
Posted by: Desert Cat at November 18, 2007 10:34 PM (DIr0W)
14
Um . . . Kitty. Don't you think you're engaging in a little bit of moral equivalence, here? I mean, in (e.g.) Afghanistan, our mistake was withdrawing too abruptly and creating a power vacuum--to be filled with some of the young Islamic activists we'd empowered, among others.
But the guys we were fighting used to disguise land mines as toys, so that children would pick them up and be blown up. I'm not so sure that, in fighting the Soviet monster, we became anything quite so monstrous ourselves . . .
Posted by: Attila Girl at November 19, 2007 12:24 AM (aywD+)
15
Don't you think you're engaging in a little bit of moral equivalence, here?
Missed this part maybe:
And I'm not saying there weren't good reasons for many of the above actions.
No, I don't think so. I'm not trying to anyway. But you see how easy it is to sweep even the US up in such a broad generalization? What I'm saying is we need to be more specific and targeted in what we proclaim ourselves to be fighting, lest we find fingers pointing back at ourselves.
Because if, in fact we wish to keep open the possibility of a "Cold War" type struggle against Islamic extremism, then we ought to be cautious about taking things off the table that could be construed to be hypocritical if we employ them (funding resistance movements for example).
Regarding the Mujahideen, I am referring back to the 1980s when we funded, supplied, and directed that group for our own surrogate interests against the Soviets. "We" weren't technically in there at all, so I'm left wondering which sudden withdrawal you might be referring to. The Soviets ultimately withdrew. The Mujahideen--who we were supporting--were the ones disguising land mines as toys and employing the kind of tactics we claim to abhor. We weren't fighting *them* at the time.
It seems you may be suggesting that we share some of that monstrosity then? Yeah, war sucks, and we sometimes have supported terrorists in our bid to win it. I think that kind of plays into my point though. The Mujahideen were terrorists, no doubt. But they were *our* terrorists.
Yes. We are at war with all terrorists groups and those governments that fund, supply, shelter, and direct these groups for their own surrogate interests. We must to protect US interests and US citizens wherever they may be found. Our nation said "enough is enough" shortly after 9/11.
Fingers pointing back...
It seems to me that other groups, peoples and nations might see it similarly. And that an awful lot of hubris can be masked by such a Righteous and Noble War.
Are we the only ones who can protect our own interests?
Just saying.
More info here
Posted by: Desert Cat at November 19, 2007 07:03 PM (DIr0W)
16
Look, the bottom line is we need to focus on goals not tactics. We're opposed by the Islamic extremists because they want to drive us out of the Middle East and establish an Islamic Caliphate. We have substantial national interests invested in our presence in the Middle East and need to defend them. As I see it, *that's* the focus and the bottom line. What are our national interests? What is essential for us to defend? Is what we're doing legitimately advancing our national interests? (And the $64,000 question: just what constitutes our national interest?)
All the rest of this yadda yadda moral posturing and pontificating about "terrrrror" is largely bullshit and smokescreen. We do not, in fact, have our military deployed around the world facing down that laundry list of terrorist organizations that Darrell posted. And for good reason. Most of them do not impact our national interests to the degree that Al Qaeda has.
Posted by: Desert Cat at November 19, 2007 07:33 PM (DIr0W)
17
Ok, I am mistaken on one point. In reviewing some of the history I see that both the Soviets and the Mujahideen made heavy use of land mines. The Soviets did in fact deploy the "butterfly" landmines which resembled toys. The Mujahideen also used children in some of their tactics against the Soviets, including the tactic of hiding behind civilian populations.
Posted by: Desert Cat at November 19, 2007 08:59 PM (DIr0W)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
I Believe I've Solved
. . . the problem of Mandy taking up 70% of the loveseat, leaving very little room for me. I swung my feet and legs above her body, resting the right foot on the farther arm of the tiny couch.
The left knee is propping up my mom's laptop, and Mandy has her nose resting on my right knee.
Time for another sleeping pill. It turns out they work better if you take them with other pills (I picked a few at random), and wash the whole chemical salad down with some beer.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
03:35 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 101 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I would have guessed that you would wash that stuff down with gin. I guess beer works in a pinch.
Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at November 14, 2007 09:37 AM (1hM1d)
2
Sleeping pills with alcohol? I've heard that's a VERY dangerous combination.
Posted by: pst314 at November 14, 2007 06:07 PM (lCxSZ)
3
Don't try this at home. Please!
Posted by: Attila Girl at November 14, 2007 07:27 PM (aywD+)
4
Darth Aggie--
I had the gin near me, so I didn't need to drink it. Just looking at a bottle of Beefeater Wet made me feel all warm and fuzzy and happy and ready for bed.
Posted by: Attila Girl at November 14, 2007 07:29 PM (aywD+)
5
That scream you just heard? that was Atilla the Hub attacking your Beefeater Wet...
Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at November 15, 2007 10:29 AM (1hM1d)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
If We Are Winning in Iraq . . .
then how does that change the game in the 2008 election?
Insty:
[It's] bad news for the Republicans in that those who have held their nose and stuck with the GOP because of the war are likely to feel freer to vote for people they agree with on other issues. And while it's true that Iraq is not the war on terror, it's also likely that the post-2009 phase of the war on terror will involve less outright war and more spying, backstabbing, subtle undermining, bribery, extortion and cooptation. Hmm. What candidate might be good at that sort of thing?
Don't fear the reaper.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
03:14 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 121 words, total size 1 kb.
I'm at My Mom's.
Helping her get the place ready for a houseguest—who happens to be my brother. And, you know: when the Sultan of Software comes to town, everything has to be just so.
Here, late at night, I can clean things with some impunity; that's probably why I elected to spend the night. But when my mother is around, the rules of engagement are different. It is paramount that she interrupt me every few minutes with some of the following types of concerns:
• "No! Don't put those piles of paper together. I had them sorted!"
• "Oh! Instead of dusting, would you fold laundry?"
• "No!" (This one's directed at the dog, but I swing around, wondering what I'm doing wrong.)
• "The way I usually do that is, I . . ."
• "You're not throwing that away, are you?"
Of course not. When you have a house that's cluttered up to the rafters, and you're trying to transform it into a livable environment, the last thing you want to do is throw anything away. Particularly when it's a partially used paper towel, or the plastic lid from a carton of cottage cheese.
Mandy decided I was probably playing some kind of fun game, and got in my way a lot until I lost my shit and yelled at her, warning her to not jump on me while I was doing housework. That subdued her for a while.
Meanwhile, I have obligations creeping up on me from my volunteer life. But for the next day or so, I'll want to focus on Matricide Avoidance.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
02:54 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 272 words, total size 1 kb.
November 13, 2007
Now That's Cute!
Iowahawk's got a new
post up (car-related, rather than satiric or political).
I should have something like this. Perhaps not, though: I've noticed that small people tend to like big cars, and big people tend to like small cars.
Is that because some people consider their rides a type of avatar? If so, this gives the driver a chance to "try on" a new body type—metaphorically.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
10:22 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 72 words, total size 1 kb.
Giving the Lie to Producers' Claims.
Re: the writer's strike, Glenn has a note from one of the writer/producers involved, along with some devastating
video that shows them bragging about all the revenue they'll be making from the internet—while continuing to insist that writers' compensation shouldn't take these monies into account.
Bonus question for my younger readers: The added background sounds are a persistent clicking, along with the ringing of a bell (thank you, foley artists). What are these noises meant to represent?
Posted by: Attila Girl at
12:17 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 89 words, total size 1 kb.
1
hahahahahahahahahahahahha. I remember those thingies....
Posted by: caltechgirl at November 13, 2007 01:37 PM (IfXtw)
2
When you wonder why Hollywood keeps producing movies which embody a worldview in which America is evil, perhaps the answer is that these Hollywood people just look in their own hearts and report what they see.
Posted by: pst314 at November 14, 2007 06:13 PM (lCxSZ)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
What I'm Reading.
A cool
book about the erosion of civil liberties by Jonathan Rauch. (A bit out of date; I hope he revises it at some point.)
In case my SoCon readers want something to be annoyed by, they can always check this one out.
I love Jonathan Rauch.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
05:26 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 53 words, total size 1 kb.
86kb generated in CPU 0.1584, elapsed 0.1692 seconds.
30 queries taking 0.1465 seconds, 105 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.