March 21, 2007
Goodbye, Cathy Seipp.
You will be
missed.
As I'm sure you've heard, her family is suggesting that donations be sent to the Lung Cancer Alliance, which fights to increase the investment in research to prevent/cure lung cancer, along with battling the idea that lung cancer victims should somehow be stagmatized.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
09:24 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 53 words, total size 1 kb.
Mandy Is Home Again.
She crept into my mother's house in the middle of the night last night via the dog door, went into her room, and licked her hand.
I've got maybe half of the flyers torn down; I'll get the rest of them taken down tomorrow.
I'm very happy now, but I wonder what that dog got into during her 36 hours on the lam: she smells awful.
Stupid dog: she gave us a heck of a fright. I've been punishing her by feeding her treats and petting her and throwing an oversized tennis ball for her to fetch.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
09:09 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 105 words, total size 1 kb.
So, We Take a Break.
We go out to grab a late lunch, or an early supper, or whatever one wants to call it.
I'm with the mom at Panera, which I love for the good food and the free WiFi.
Mom goes to the loo; I check my e-mail. When she returns, she sees that my laptop is open, and says, "there's a sign over there that says 'high-speed internet.'"
I look up at her, over my glasses.
"Oh. Is that what you're using now?"
"Yes, indeed."
"You don't have a cable hooked up, or anything."
I say nothing, because to get annoyed would mean that I naively expected she was listening to me all the times I've told her how convenient WiFi is, etc. etc., and how I only take a cable with me when I travel, in case the WiFi doesn't work.
And I do not want to appear naive.
Fortunately, the waiter shows up with my onion soup, and I realize quickly that the most magnificent thing in the world is onion soup without an excessive amount of cheese in it. Onion soup in which one can really taste the onion. And I'm too much in love with this long-overdue interpretation of the dish to care much one way or another just how often it is that my mother really does listen to the things I say.
But who knows if I'll be hanging on her every word after this . . .
Posted by: Attila Girl at
04:13 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 252 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I'm going to go with your mom on this one. Hearing about something, especially something that you are totally unfamiliar with and SEEING IT in action are two different things. It's doesn't mean she wasn't listening. It means that it looks like something that she could do and that interests her. I'm sure your word pictures were like being there, obviously. I'm not stupid. I have to comment on YOUR blog, you know.
Posted by: Darrell at March 23, 2007 09:16 AM (jcUK2)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Oooh, oooh!
I want a print of
this poster.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
04:02 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 11 words, total size 1 kb.
1
With only a few minor changes, this poster would fit right in at the typical moonbat-fest.
Posted by: david foster at March 21, 2007 06:45 AM (/Z304)
2
The propaganda of WWII is a rather interesting area to study. From what I've seen, Goebbels appears to have lived in a nest so feathered with his ideas that he could not clearly perceive the outside world.
Posted by: John at March 22, 2007 07:43 PM (fptav)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Blogging Will Be Light Until the Cows Come Home.
Or, perhaps, until my mother's dog does.
If you live near LAX, please be on the lookout for a beautiful black pit bull wearing a purple collar.
I tried not to spazz out about it when Mandy went missing yesterday evening, but it rained today, which means that all the flyers I distributed in Westchester this afternoon (Tuesday afternoon, that is) have been ruined.
More importantly, it means that Mandy's sense of smell won't help her to get back home.
If she's still alive, that is: there are big, busy boulevards near my mother's house, and Mandy never seemed to get the idea of what a street was: most of what she does she does very quickly, very exuberently. The odds may not be that good that she's still alive.
I choose to have hope, which means my new hobby is producing flyers and placing them on lamp posts and trees near my mother's house. (My mother is 70 years old, and recovering from a hurt knee. Furthermore, I want someone to be at the house to greet the dog, should she come home.)
Therefore, you'll strictly get what I need to write in order to wind down—for the next several days, or until the heartache I feel subsides to a dull sort of thumpety-thump I can ignore.
If you can bring yourself to pray for a sweet, spirited fourteen-month-old puppy, please do so.
I just want my my mother's dog back. Other than that, I'm pretty much going through the motions right now. Working, doing housework. And thinking about my dog.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
02:09 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 280 words, total size 2 kb.
1
And don't fuck with my entry, either: I see the misspelling, and the split infinitive, and the double-colons in one "sentence."
The editress is off-fucking-duty tonight. Deal.
Posted by: Attila Girl at March 21, 2007 02:21 AM (0CbUL)
2
I added you and k to my nightime prayer list about a year ago. . . What's one more? Does Mandy have an ID chip? Post the date and time and general location(GPS coordinates?) she went missing. Maybe there is someone reading with satellite recon access???? A license number for a car that picked the dog up? Please???
Posted by: Darrell at March 21, 2007 08:24 PM (MKplH)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
March 20, 2007
Cathy Siepp
. . . may only be on this earth for
a few more days.
Pray for her, if that's the sort of thing you do.
I've tried praying, but I may just cuss God out when/if she finally succombs to the cancer. The unfairness of it all gets to me, despite the great attitude Cathy maintained: she was truly aware of what a crap shoot this life business is.
I want a miracle, folks.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
02:52 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 78 words, total size 1 kb.
"Pitch Your Offsets"
Ace is offering
sex offsets, for those whose libertine lifestyles bring them wrenching guilt:
I haven't been with a woman since college, and have had little other sex during this time frame. Given the way I look, my attitude, my lack of charm, and the fact I make crap money writing a stupid moronblog—I don't expect this to change much in the ensuing years.
Especially because I'm beyond my "good years." If those were my good years, Dear Lord, I quake at the thought of middle age. So please send me some money.
Personally, I can offer gin offsets. That is, if you feel your inadequate intake of gin is putting juniper farmers out of business, I can baptize you in the sweet healing waters of a virtual martini. Send me money, and I'll drink more gin, thereby priming the juniper berry economy and bringing you boozey redemption.
UPDATE: Hackbarth has an interesting take on the potential of "checkbook environmentalism." Sure, it's funny to watch hypocritical limousine liberals use their impressive disposable incomes to dispose of guilt, but does the idea have potential for sober adults?
Carbon credits is a new market still in development. Trial and error is the name of the game. Rules need to be established that define a carbon credit. Once thatÂ’s in effect we should see the establishment of carbon credit exchanges like those for stocks, bonds, and commodities. Developing such carbon credit markets engages the powerful force of self-interest and capitalizes on dispersed knowledge which may reduce more carbon dioxide emissions at a lower cost than top-down government-mandated regulations.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
12:26 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 271 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Saving the world from a harmless, essential trace(some 380 parts per MILLION) gas is on par with the silliest missions mankind has ever concocted, undertaken. We'll envy those guys that speculated on how many angels could dance on the head of a pin.
When we we all learn that it's all about wealth transfer? And like the first Socialist that saw his neighbor building a wonderful dwelling out of stone and killed him for it when it was completed, today's social engineers can only propose taking the wealth that Capitalism has created and transferring it into their pockets, with a few shekels (dinars with Socialists?) given to developing nations as an aside. That's the only "green" that matters in this whole exercise.
By the way, the European Climate Exchange and the Chicago Climate Exchange will be the exclusive marketplaces for the trading carbon credits. And Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley--currently the "wind beneath Nancy Pelosi's wings" in these matter before Congress will be the primary US beneficiaries of their "cap-and-trade schemes." The outgoing chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., wrote in the Dec. 18 Wall Street Journal, cap-and-trade “would cost the average American family more than $2,700 a year while having no measurable impact on global temperature.” I see that as a conservative estimate. And you do know that brokers make money up or down in the market, don't you? Think of that the next time one calls you when you are on the toilet in the morning, getting ready to go to work. They don't even thank you for buying them their new cars, even.
Posted by: Darrell at March 20, 2007 08:35 PM (zuGmj)
2
LMA, can't we just send you gin? We'd hate to see you squander our offsets on food or something frivolous like that.
Posted by: Darrell at March 20, 2007 09:11 PM (zuGmj)
3
Funny you should say that: I am, at this moment, drinking gin that you sent me for Christmas. This is from that tiny little bottle of good old Tanqueray. (Yes--I have a few of those left! Yum!)
This is the first dirty martini I've consumed since my stay in Washington, D.C. The first hard liquor, in fact, since I got back from the East Coast. (On airplanes, I consume bloody Marys, for some reason: probably a craving for vitamin C.)
Posted by: Attila Girl at March 21, 2007 02:17 AM (0CbUL)
4
And, yeah--my jury is still out on the "greenhouse effect" as a contributor to global warming. And it's out on global warming itself as a for-sure-and-certain Bad Thing.
However, a lot of the activity that comes under the rubric of "avoiding global warming" has potentially bitchin' side effects, such as: 1) encouraging alternative energy sources, and thereby hastening the day when we can tell the Saudis/Iranians to fuck themselves, and 2) keeping pollution at a manageable level in the cities. As a chick with sensitive lungs and lots of allergies--who prefers blue skies to brown ones--I don't see anything to cry about when it comes to better air.
Don't get me wrong: I'm pro-capitalist. But I love the idea that countries we consider "developing" now will be using better technology than we did at the equivalent phases in our own development. Go with God, my brothers and sisters.
Posted by: Attila Girl at March 21, 2007 02:32 AM (0CbUL)
5
Every dollar misspent on nonsense is a further delay in achieving energy independence. Every dollar spent by industry 'fighting' Demon CO2 will be paid back by the consumer. And it is a dollar that would be better spent on anything of real value, like alternative fuels research. Just imagine the world where the New World Odor(sic) is finally funded--with at least a $Trillion from the US economy alone. Where do you think the funds to fight the War on Terror will come from? It will have to move to the European "police action" response--doing nothing of any real value. Inspector Clouseau reporting for duty!
Posted by: Darrell at March 21, 2007 08:12 PM (MKplH)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
March 19, 2007
Blue Cheese in a Ham Sandwich?
I don't know if I can
endorse that.
But let me think it through.
The fact is—as some of you know—I'm a bit of a ham and cheese fanatic, and I've tried a number of approaches to this highly unkosher art form. Favorites include the slightly grilled version featured at my local chef academy's cafe that features good cheddar, and a panino with ham, jack, and mushroom served at my favorite coffee house on olive bread.
When I worked at the Foodie Magazine and we had a presentation in the conference room, I tended to order pancetta and gruyere on the company dime.
But blue cheese . . . hm. I suppose it would work, if the ham were low-key enough. Most of the time I see the cheese as providing the yin, and the ham as going yang. If the reverse were to work, it would make me very happy indeed. The challenge, always, is to create a sandwich that doesn't taste like a salt lick: in a mediocre restaurant, that's the first thing that hits you with your bad ham and cheese: salt. Ick.
I imagine if I found the right ham to go with Roaring 40s Blue, I could die right then, content. Prosciutto, maybe.
Suddenly, I'm hungry.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
11:58 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 223 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Have you considered that this was inspired by your previous post? First you start reading Mary Katherine Ham. Nine and a half hours later, all you can think about is the next perfect ham sandwich. Coincidence? I suspect you didn't wait that long.
Posted by: Darrell at March 20, 2007 08:23 AM (i7iyW)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
More Rumors on Fred Thompson
It looks like Mary Katherine Ham wants to
draft him almost as much as I do.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
02:30 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 26 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I think it has something to do with the Sean Connery effect. Chicks digs the old, dignified actors leaving us youngins asking, "Why?"
Posted by: Sean Hackbarth at March 20, 2007 08:55 PM (QJ5cf)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
March 18, 2007
Light Blogging the Rest of the Weekend.
The good news: I've recovered from producing the monthly newsletter for Ye Olde Nonprofit. It also looks like I'll finally be getting some help with some of the management work I do for them as a staffer.
In our monthly meeting yesterday morning the Chairman remarked that it was perfectly obvious I was overloaded with responsibilities, and that other people needed to start pulling their weight. And for a split second I felt offended—angry that he would insult me by suggesting I couldn't handle the extreme load I was carrying. Fortunately, I kept my mouth shut and allowed myself to be treated as if I were a human being rather than a sort of robotic super-heroine.
Are all women like this, or does it have to do with the way I was raised? It's so pathological, it's funny. Sort of.
So I'm taking it easy today: no politics. Light human-interest blogging if the spirit strikes.
Mostly I intend to work on my fiction, go to the party, and finish consuming the delicious Ellery Queen mystery I have my nose in right now.
A shout-out to Darrell: I got your writing prompt, and have a first draft of a short story based on same. I'm not sure if I'll be presenting it at the reading party today, though. It clearly isn't finished. I might just cop out and read another chapter excerpt there.
And I'll either post the story—about the woman with the mis-matched socks—or send it to you. Once it's finished, of course.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
07:14 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 267 words, total size 2 kb.
1
I don't think it's a woman thing since I'd be slightly offended if someone said I couldn't cut it all by myself. Of course, I'd keep my mouth shut too. Being a good economist I concern myself deeply about my self interest.
Posted by: Sean Hackbarth at March 18, 2007 05:20 PM (QJ5cf)
2
But I'm doing 2-3 volunteer jobs over there, in addition to my work as a staffer.
Posted by: Attila Girl at March 18, 2007 09:20 PM (0CbUL)
3
Wow! Now I know you're overworked when you take a suggestion from me! ;-) I am honored, though.
I would have sworn you would be writing about that girl who discovered which beer is brewed through a Clydesdale. . .
Posted by: Darrell at March 19, 2007 03:31 AM (z5oXf)
4
"robotic super-heroine"
Can't think of one off hand. You've discovered something. Find an artist and start up a comic book.
Posted by: Sean Hackbarth at March 19, 2007 09:33 PM (QJ5cf)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
March 16, 2007
An Eternal Plame
Tom Maguire is having
too much fun:
Finally, John Podhoretz provides a funny bit of testimony telling us that, although she did not recommend her hubby for the 2002 Niger trip, Ms. Wilson went to her boss accompanied by the man who did, talked to her hubby about the assignment, and wrote the recommending email. She also (per the SSCI) had recommended her hubby for his 1999 trip to Niger. So please pardon our confusion about her obvious non-involvement here. (And how will this be treated in the movie? Will Val be dragged into her boss's office at gunpoint? Or depending on how they want to position the film, the producer could have the CIA waterboard her into giving up her husband's name - good looking woman, bondage, water everywhere... just thinking out loud and trying to help. TGIF.)
Uh-huh.
Via, well . . . Maguire.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
11:16 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 152 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Water and bondage makes me wanna watch Waterworld, dunno why
Posted by: gr8inferno at March 16, 2007 09:07 PM (VgP/D)
2
What might that look like? Especially if she wears a white ribbed cotton top? Or white silk blouse?
And I write memos all the time when someone I don't know walks up and asks me to. . . A Sooper-Secrud Ajent indeed! And sharp as a penny!
Posted by: Darrell at March 16, 2007 10:32 PM (F3ea3)
3
How's this for a ridiculous answer: He wasn't paid for the trip, she had two young children at home and wanted him to help out with them, and the war that Joe wison wanted to discredit was more than a year away from starting. Ask yourself a simple question, why would she recommend him -- for what purpose (other than she knew how imminently qualified he was for the mission and they were both patriots)?
Posted by: drew phillips at March 21, 2007 02:55 PM (9QwKd)
4
Drew, you aren't serious, are you? I mean, you aren't really buying Plame's line on this . . .?
Posted by: Attila Girl at March 21, 2007 08:59 PM (0CbUL)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
The Plame Game
William Branigin of
WaPo:
Plame said she wasn't a lawyer and didn't know what her legal status was but said it shouldn't have mattered to the officials who learned her identity.
"They all knew that I worked with the CIA," Plame said. "They might not have known what my status was but that alone—the fact that I worked for the CIA—should have put up a red flag."
Translation: No, I wasn't really a covert agent. But I'm happy to play the victim here—particularly if I can get a seven-figure book deal out of it.
She didn't know what her status was. Words fail me.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
10:33 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 110 words, total size 1 kb.
1
The thought of Saint Val of Arc, having her hair messed up after a good, thorough water-boarding, was enough to make me wonder about History. Good thing this was NOT barbarian France (when France was at war) and wont to burning gals at the stake.....
Posted by: mighty aphrodite at March 16, 2007 03:21 PM (13j7o)
2
I took that to mean that she did not know if she was covered by the very specific wording of the IIPA, but that she was still engaged in classified activity. I do not know the penalties for releasing classfied information, including identities, that is not covered by the IIPA, but it still comes across as being a bad thing.
Posted by: wanderingmoderate at March 18, 2007 09:59 PM (EBbJ0)
3
Thanks for dropping by. On another thread, a reader of mine has related a story about calling her at CIA headquarters, and getting her voice mail: "this is Valerie Plame . . ."
Granted, this was a few days after the story broke, but I doubt that it changed anything: "Oh, no: I'm a covert [or quasi-covert] agent, and my identity is now known. My career is over! My cover is blown! I guess I'll record an outgoing message for my voice mail."
I'm unable to buy the idea that her identity was any kind of a secret.
Posted by: Attila Girl at March 19, 2007 01:54 PM (0CbUL)
4
Well, all I can say is that the CIA apparently agrees that she was covert. When she testified before Congres, Representative Waxman read a statement prepared by the CIA, and reviewed by the Director, who is a Bush appointee. Relevant quote.
"During her employment at the CIA, Ms. Wilson was undercover. Her employment status with the CIA was classified information, prohibited from disclosure under Executive Order 12958. At the time of the publication of Robert Novak's column on July 14, 2003, Ms. Wilson's CIA employment status was covert. This was classified information. Ms. Wilson served in senior management positions at the CIA in which she oversaw the work for other CIA employees and she attained the level of GS-14 -- Step Six under the federal pay scale. Ms. Wilson worked on some of the most sensitive and highly secretive matters handled by the CIA. Ms. Wilson served at various times overseas for the CIA."
Unless your definition of classified, undercover, prohibited from disclosure, covert, and highly secretive is different from theirs, I have to say it seems like she was indeed secret. As for your previous commentor, I can think of two possible explanations. One, that he was the benificiary of an accidental security breach, and got into a telephone exchange that he should not have been. The other is that he is not being honest- sorry but there really is no other way to say it. Again, the question of whether or not she was specifically covered by the very narrowly written IIPA may be open to discussion. But as for her employment being a secret, all I can say is that I would tend to rely more on an official CIA announcement that she was, than from a deduction made from an unverifiable claim on a blog.
Posted by: wanderingmoderate at March 20, 2007 08:46 PM (EBbJ0)
5
Fine. I get the notion that you're not going to trust every person you "meet" at the virtual cocktail party that is the World Wide Web.
But if her status was indeed "covert," why weren't any real charges brought in this case? I know everyone says, "it isn't the crime; it's the coverup." That's sunk into everyone's consciousness, post-Watergate. However: if an unlawful disclosure were made, surely someone other that Scooter Libby should have been charged . . . ?
The CIA is a bureaucracy, like the State Department is. I can't see why its circling of the wagons in this instance proves anything--particularly if Plame herself wasn't willing to rely on this "official" pronouncement in her testimony.
Posted by: Attila Girl at March 21, 2007 02:45 AM (0CbUL)
6
The operative word is "reviewed" by. Such review only considers if classified information is being disclosed. The CIA doesn't proofread or fact check an author's work. In other words, if you don't have it right, they won't do your work for you. See the difference? And "prepared by the CIA"? Read your Wiki carefully.
"On March 16, 2007, Plame testified before the committee. Henry Waxman read a prepared statement that was cleared by the CIA."
"Cleared by" is not "prepared by". For that you would have to look for the little Democrat(ic) 'elves' in the hollow tree.
Posted by: Darrell at March 21, 2007 09:11 AM (Km7u8)
7
Well, if I trusted everyone I met on the Web, that would have to include the person I found shortly after I discovered it, talking about the Nazi moon landings in the 1940s. A little bit of discretion is advised. :-)
As for the lack of more substantial charges, if Al Capone really did run massive bootlegging, narcotics and prostitution rackets, and killed dozens of people to do so, why did they just charge him with that penny-ante tax evasion stuff? Lack of more serious charges doesn't mean there was no crime committed. It may mean only that the prosecution isn't sure it can win a case. (A Few Good Men: "It doesn't matter what I know. It only matters what I can prove!") Or, to be fair, it may mean the investigation suggests more a combination of poor security and ineptness than a premeditated crime. (One of my favorite quotes: "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." Don't ask me who said it.) Either way, though, it can be difficult to determine what happened, and specifically if a crime was committed, if people insist on lying to the investigators. And according to the jury that is exactly what Libby did. I must say, I am curious why he would.
On the prepared vs. reviewed bit- touche, I should have read that more carefully. That being said, I find it difficult to believe that the CIA director would not take the informal opportunity to correct Rep. Waxman. There is nothing in that statement that makes the CIA look good. If a classified agent's cover was blown, that is, if nothing else, terrible for internal morale. If she was simply an unimportant employee, it is in their interest to say so. For what it is worth, David Corn and Michael Isikoff, in their book Hubris, say that she was "operations chief for the Joint Task Force on Iraq, a unit in the clandestine Directorate of Operations that mounted spying operations in search of intelligence on Iraq's supposed WMD programs." If true, that sounds rather secretive to me, and suggests experience in covert affairs.
Posted by: wanderingmoderate at March 22, 2007 08:38 PM (EBbJ0)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Plame: I R a Sooper-Secrud Ajent
And I need to live in the
shadows.
Brian Flemming's lefty take from 2003 on the Vanity Fair photo flap:
Of course, a logical person would realize that Joseph Wilson and his wife could be self-promoters and at the same time it could also be also true that someone at a high-level in the White House illegally outed Plame for revenge and/or as a warning (especially since the most compelling information has come not from Wilson, but from CIA sources). And it wouldn't even matter if Plame's face were totally shown--her cover was 100% blown already (by the White House, apparently), so she'll never be undercover again, picture or no picture.
Fair enough. But was she undercover at the time? And, if so, why was she consorting with the press while undercover? And why was it distressing for someone in her office to be asked for information by the Vice President? Cliff May from the Corner remarks:
IsnÂ’t providing intelligence to the White House among the main purposes for which the CIA was created?
Evidently not. Evidently junior CIA officers have better things to do.
Does Plamegate make you feel like Alice in Wonderland? You're not alone.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
10:12 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 209 words, total size 2 kb.
1
So when does Dick Armetiage get charged? Or does the MSM even listen to their own reports?
Posted by: Jack at March 16, 2007 11:28 AM (RA61y)
2
No indictments. Just another chance for the MSM to push that fantasy story they spent years crafting. And to take a few more kicks at Bush, Cheney, and Rove. Funny how the Press has nothing to add when the Dems put on a dog-and-pony show. They just play the tapes , then repeat what the tapes say and repeat the Democrat spin. When Bush tries to defend a minor point, they suddenly provide a treasure-trove of counter information, including statements from those with opposing views. I never heard Armitage's name even mentioned today. Much less that she had already been outed years before by Aldridge Ames. Then again by the Swiss to the Cubans..."Mischt!!! I thought that was our order for Cuban cigars!" Who knew the third time(or 103rd time, if you include the times Wilson mentioned his wife working for the CIA when working the public speakers' tour months before the July 10, 2003 article by Novak, the DC Christmas parties for years where people like Andrea Mitchell heard Plame say she works for the CIA, Joe Wilson's Who's Who listing, and...oh, forget it. Everybody knows James Bond by name, if not by sight.
She was listed in the Langley directory, btw. I know. I called the reception desk a couple of days after the Novak article. The receptionist put me through to a secretary who said Ms Plame is not at her desk, then put me through to her voice mail before I could tell her to forget it. The voice mail message said "This is Valerie Plame. I'm not in my office right now . . ."
Posted by: Darrell at March 16, 2007 09:44 PM (F3ea3)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
So, It Could Be Worse.
We could be operating without the separation of church and state, as Britain is.
What a great idea: public funding of Islamic schools, without any particular oversight.
Personally, I don't see what the European aversion to headscarves is all about, and I don't have any problem with non-Muslim girls wearing headscarves in Muslim schools. After all, we expect non-Catholic kids to wear uniforms when they go to Catholic schools, and we expect goyim men to wear yarmulkes when they attend synogogues. This is perfectly appropriate.
What I don't get—as usual—is tolerance of the intolerant. Such as accrediting or authorizing schools that refer to Jews as monkeys, and Christians as pigs. And I don't see providing public funds for educational establishments that promote values sharply at odds with those of the society at large.
Just as the Constitution wasn't meant to be a suicide pact, Classical Liberalism was not intended that way. What is going on in the West?
Posted by: Attila Girl at
08:21 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 168 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Classical Liberalism died when it became a pretext for seeking power at any cost. The British version of this transformation entails the British Labour Party letting Muslims have their way at the expense of Christians, who mostly favor the Conservative Party.
"It's all about the power."
Posted by: John at March 18, 2007 07:17 PM (XYl4B)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Earning Their Pork Chops
Over at The American Mind, Sean Hackbarth
took a look at the Emergency Appropriations bill; he's had to go on cholesterol medication just from reading it through.
I went through his digest of the spending spree: some of the allocations looked like they might even be legitimate, but not without adequate debate. Which brings us to the bad habit of treating normal spending as an emergency. Congress is supposed to provide oversight to the Executive Branch, but who provides oversight to them? A few bloggers like Sean, and that's it:
Slogging through the 2007 Emergency Supplemental put together by House Democrats you wonder what the purpose of the document really is. If you thought it was to fund continuing military operations in Iraq you’re partly right. You’d also be right if you thought it was to pay off constituencies at taxpayers’ expense. “Buying their way to defeat” sums up the Democrats’ efforts here.
But of course the Republicans have never been slouches in the "spending like drunken sailors" department, as James Joyner points out:
ThereÂ’s not much partisan hay to be made here since, goodness knows, the Republicans had more pork than a Jimmy Dean sausage factory in their bills. It does demonstrate, however, that promises to come to Washington and impose spending restraint are almost always laughably hollow. WeÂ’re barely two months into the new Democratic Congress and already any pretense is over.
This is the kind of thing that I tend to lay at Bush's feet: it's not as if he can credibly threaten to veto the bill. His track record there is abysmal, and he's not even particularly cooperative about efforts to create more transparency in spending. This is the President who led the charge to save our endangered earmarks, after all.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
07:46 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 303 words, total size 2 kb.
March 15, 2007
Live, on L.A. Commie Radio!
My friend Professor David J. Linden of Johns Hopkins University will be on the Patt Morrison show tomorrow on KPCC, talking about his recent book,
The Accidental Mind, which traces fun and quirky features/functions in our brains to the evolutionary processes that shaped the human mind.
If you don't live in the Los Angeles area, or won't be able to listen tomorrow at 2:00 p.m., it looks like you can listen later, right off of Patt Morrison's page, here. I have no idea how long they'll leave the podcasts up, though.
David has a blog, by the way: it contains fun stories from his career—a few of which I remember hearing at parties in the 70s, 80s, and 90s.
I hope he sells a lot of books, and gets oodles of readers for his blog. But fewer books than I sell. And, of course, fewer blog-readers. I'd like him to do just well enough in both arenas to be worth beating.
No, seriously: buy his book. It is written for the lay person. He's funny, and he knows craploads of interesting stuff about the brain.
UPDATE: David's been pre-empted by a harrowing tale of the firefight in Sadr City, which Morrison and her guest, Martha Raddatz, see as "a microcosm of the entire Iraq war."
Posted by: Attila Girl at
11:37 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 225 words, total size 2 kb.
Rick Moran on Mrs. Clinton
He
recognizes that the most vocal Democrats want her to renounce the war, but doesn't seem to remember that the further she veers to the left for the primary, the more ground she has to gain in the general election, when it's time to tack back to the center.
Furthermore, it's still very early in terms of what's going on in Iraq and the War on Terror in general: apologizing for her vote now could cost her a lot later on.
I do think, however, that she ought to put her husband on a shorter leash: he's a brilliant politician, but he brings a lot of baggage with him, and she doesn't need that additional weight.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
11:02 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 126 words, total size 1 kb.
1
So she would make a good president then?
Posted by: Desert Cat at March 16, 2007 06:49 AM (xdX36)
Posted by: Attila Girl at March 16, 2007 07:22 AM (0CbUL)
3
Wow. I was thinking out loud there. I don't exactly remember posting that.
Reminder: never never comment before the caffeine kicks in...
Posted by: Desert Cat at March 16, 2007 11:14 PM (xdX36)
4
I actually think Mrs. Clinton might be an effective wartime President, if not "the most uncompromising wartime President in U.S. History."
My argument with her has to do with the havoc she could wreak economically, even in four years. And, of course, the ties any Democratic president would be stuck with WRT the teachers' unions, lawyers, etc.
That would be the major distinction between her and, say, a GOP statist. But goodness knows she'd be better than Gore or Edwards or Obama.
Posted by: Attila Girl at March 19, 2007 02:05 PM (0CbUL)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
The Great Global Warming Swindle
At least for now, Google Video has the entire UK documentary online
here.
It's an hour and a quarter long, so grab a whole carafe of coffee before you go over there. Very nicely done: it's accessible to non-scientists, too.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
12:11 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 50 words, total size 1 kb.
Prius vs. Hummer
Interesting
take.
I'll admit that hybrids are still a bit of an investment, and that in strict dollars-and-cents terms it's often more practical to simply buy a fuel-efficient non-hybrid. But when I look at where electric cars were ten years ago, I'm still amazed that electric engines (or partically electric ones) have come as far as they have. And, yes: I think they have a place in leveraging us away from our sick co-dependency with the House of Saud.
The more demand goes up for hybrids, the more efficiently batteries will be produced. And the more cleanly—because Toyota and Honda are on a roll, and they won't want to spoil that.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
12:07 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 117 words, total size 1 kb.
March 14, 2007
More Rejection of
D'Souza's
The Enemy at Home, by Stanley Kurtz, over at NRO's
The Corner (where they occasionally stop interacting with each other long enough to post something for
readers to read). Kurtz plays his ace in the hole: a condemnation of D'Souza's book by Richard John Neuhaus.
Et tu, Neuhaus? Then fall, DÂ’Souza.
Naturally, I thought that was rather good. But you know how I adore Shakespeare.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
11:24 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 72 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Isn't D'Souza the same dude that made Ann Coulter who she is today. I like the fact that he goes to the conservative heart through dating. Good on you mate, one more for the sub-continent; is he now ashamed of his creation? I wonder, if someday Attila will distance herself from Darrell in the same way.
Posted by: azmat Hussain at March 18, 2007 07:02 PM (mdszq)
2
I think it's pretty clear that Darrell and I don't agree completely on several issues (including Coulter).
But he's my biggest supporter and most loyal reader. How often do you stop by here, Azmat?
That said, there's no reason for a writer to distance herself from a reader who disagrees with her. I'm flattered by your comparing me with a syndicated columnist like Coulter, but I simply don't have that kind of following--and I rather like it that way. I don't want to be famous.
As far as India is concerned, I agree in that respect with Mark Steyn: India is rising, and may be--along with the States and Australia--the premier preserver of "Western" Values in the century to come. And then, of course, we'll have to stop calling them Western, and go back to the term "Classical Liberalism." Which I'm all in favor of.
Posted by: Attila Girl at March 19, 2007 02:13 PM (0CbUL)
3
I check up on you every week or so. Just wanna know who the right is beating up on lately. If it is not gay-bashing, then it has to be Islamophobia, I don't think that you and Darrell are on the same page, but at the same time you are so kind to him. Your responses give that away. He could write the most outrageous comment and your response will be "don't you think you are stretching a bit here Darrell" LOL
I agree who wants to be like Coulter. Stay the course you are doing fine.
Posted by: Azmat Hussain at March 19, 2007 08:14 PM (mdszq)
4
I'm kind to everyone. Except that time I lost my temper with the Schussel-bots.
And I don't consider myself to be either a homophobe, or an Islamophobe. Though I do have a healthy respect for Islamo-fascism.
Posted by: Attila Girl at March 19, 2007 10:31 PM (0CbUL)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
82kb generated in CPU 0.1177, elapsed 0.1342 seconds.
34 queries taking 0.1013 seconds, 106 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.