But I need to find another source for it: for a while I could get Kern's Pineapple-Mango juice for $2.49 at our local tiny Ralph's (the most expensive Ralph's in the world, but within walking distance, so worth it if one only needs a few little things).

I knew it wasn't a great price, but orange juice was mostly that price, too, because of the frost last year. So I got what I preferred to drink.

Then the Kern's tropical juices went up to $2.99 for a half gallon, and that was just beyond the pale. I couldn't do it. There are a few other options: Paul Newman lemonade is less, so maybe that's my next juice jag. I went back to the OJ section, though, and most of them were also marked up to $2.99. Way at the bottom was store-brand citrus juice at $2 a carton.

I wonder if Costco sells mango juice. I'm sure some of the local Middle Eastern markets do, but I doubt I'll be doing better on price at any of them. Trader Joe's? Smart and Final? Bank jobs to support my mango-juice habit? Holding up people as they come out of Ralph's to demand that they hand over the mango, or the mango-pineapple, or the mango-guava, "and no one will get hurt"?

More will be revealed, I suppose.

I mean, prices weren't wonderful at the Ralph's in La Canada, but they were liveable (well, one had to double-check the grapes and cherries, of course: those could get a bit silly if they'd travelled too far, or weren't in season, or there wasn't a sale going on).

But at the itty-bitty Ralph's here on the north side of Glendale? I concluded my price check by noticing that fresh-squeezed local orange juice (the only kind my mother would buy from Fireside market in Santa Monica in the 70s/80s) was a mere seven dollars for a half gallon. Or two for $14. Or they would trade me a selection of my half-dozen favorite juices for my engagement ring, because it features a champagne diamond . . .

What I really want, though, is mango juice. And lots of it.

Someone's got to have it at a decent price. I don't want to be forced into a life of crime because of some "correction" in the tropical-juice market.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 10:16 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 403 words, total size 2 kb.

Taranto (last item):

On the Other Hand, He Plans to Raise God's Taxes Through the Roof

Barack Obama is getting a bum rap for one comment he made during the Rick Warren forum:

Warren: Now, let's deal with abortion; 40 million abortions since Roe v. Wade. As a pastor, I have to deal with this all of the time, all of the pain and all of the conflicts. I know this is a very complex issue. Forty million abortions. At what point does a baby get human rights, in your view?

Obama: Well, you know, I think that whether you're looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade.

This brought the Republican Attack Machine out in full force. "Insulting and mendacious," says The New Criterion's Roger Kimball. "Evasive and unsatisfying," adds Commentary's Jennifer Rubin. National Review's Mark Hemingway calls it a "spectacularly inept metaphor" and writes, "News flash: There's not a job on the planet above the pay grade of the President of the United States."

It is left to blogress Ann Althouse to come to Obama's defense:

I'm pretty sure he meant to refer to God.

"Above my pay grade" is an expression of humility and submission to God: I don't purport to answer the question that belongs to God.

Obama just can't win with these right-wingers, can he? For months they've been blasting him for acting like the Messiah. Now they're attacking him for acknowledging he's not God.

Well, not yet, anyway.

I've never heard the expression used that way, as an allusion to the Divine. I know it isn't always purely literal: an engineer might say that about literary analysis, and a fiction writer might say that about the mechanics of building a bridge. But I've never heard it used by, say, a member of the clergy or another person of faith, in alluding to the Creator of the Universe of the Monotheistic Traditions.

Any chance that Althouse was right? Discuss.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 10:04 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 355 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Item the first: Blogress? WTF is that? Blog Progress? Why not Bloggist? Or Blogotrix? I didn't even know blogger was a maasculine noun. Geez. (Taranto was high, I just know it) Item the second: I've used 'above my pay grade' to say something is not my decision to make, but someone 'higher up'. So, maybe. Then again, I always thought 'We the People' trumped POTUS anyday, so maybe Body Odour was in fact referring to overturning Roe vs Wade and letting the states decide. Which would be the first intelligent thing he's said or done this entire campaign. /yeah, right

Posted by: Gregory at August 18, 2008 11:16 PM (cjwF0)

2 The explanation is "right" only if that word is defined as "defends Democrats." And it was BS of the highest degree for Obama to make the claim in question, because he has never failed to let the destroyer come after the unborn. With every vote he has made as a legislator, he has voted that the destroyer may never be stopped. Looks to me like he thinks the call is rightfully his.

Posted by: John at August 19, 2008 03:46 AM (v0aIU)

3 No. They way you express that is via this expresssion: That's waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay above my paygrade. Talk to the Big Man upstairs. It comes down this: With a straight face, Obama chastised others for not abiding by the precepts of Matthew 25, when he had a chance to do the same and failed. For example, instead of choosing to protect and care for the least of his brothers, the unborn, by supporting a bill that would protect those born alive after failed abortion attempts, he voted against the bill. Source La Shawn Barber.

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at August 19, 2008 06:05 AM (1hM1d)

4 HIs vote in Illinois on the "born alive during a botched abortion" business was indeed and extreme act, and he has been prevaricating about it ever since. He was IN THE COMMITTEE that added language to that statewide bill (similar in wording to the later Federal bill) that specified that, should it become law, it would not redefine an UNBORN fetus as a person and become a threat to Roe v. Wade. But he voted against it anyway, and later said that this was because the "protective language" was absent. Full disclosure: I'm technically pro-choice, but I believe the numbers of abortions performed in this country annually are an obscenity, and that the extreme peer-group pressure placed on girls and women to have abortions often leads to a lot of heartache later on in their lives. The reason no girl or woman with an unplanned pregnancy is given real counseling is that neither side trusts the other to counsel in an unbiased way--and they are right. The ideal counseling would include the sort of statement that Western European girls were made to sign (and, as far as I know, still are): that they understand the gravity of the decision they are making. It would include a summary of what the adoption process works like these days, and a small warning that the girl/woman might regret her actions, years or decades later. It would not include the word "murder," but upon request it might include the fact that scientists and theologians concur: life begins at conception. I remain pro-choice. But there is no getting around the fact that abortion is the taking of a human life. Let the buyer beware. (And, BTW: whenever I go to a feminist blog and explain that I was QUITE CERTAIN in my 20s and 30s that I would never "succomb to sentimentality" and begin to have mixed feelings about my abortion at the age of 20, I'm invariably called a "troll." That is why I am only a feminist, rather than a Feminist. Small f only--no mau-mauing women into abortions, for me. And no defending the sexually predatory habits of whathisface--that guy I voted for twice, to my everlasting regret.)

Posted by: Attila Girl at August 19, 2008 11:26 AM (TpmQk)

5 Althouse was almost right--he was deferring to Satan, the "Capo de Capos" of the Left. Obama knows no directionality. People expect leaders to have opinions on every issue that affects their life. When asked for that opinion, Obama chose the coward's way out. He had no opinion as a lawmaker when he was actually deciding the issue? Or at least facilitating it?

Posted by: Darrell at August 19, 2008 12:08 PM (z26zU)

6 I figured he was saying he wasn't a theologian or biologist and wasn't qualified to comment. I suppose he picked up the lingo during his long service in the armed services. I'd like a list of other topics he isn't qualified to comment on, I'm sure it would be lengthy but informative.

Posted by: Sejanus at August 19, 2008 03:27 PM (y3IBO)

7 Well, the reason it struck me as odd is that he was campaigning for the most powerful position in the world, so to say "that's above my pay grade" sounds wimpy and dishonest, unless one is, in fact, alluding to the Divine, a thought that did not cross my idea at the time. But surely in a venue of that type if he had meant God, he should have said "God," or use one of His many nicknames? Why be shy in a venue of that type? Why be ambiguous, on such an important, resonant issue?

Posted by: Attila Girl at August 19, 2008 04:14 PM (TpmQk)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Why have to choose?

Actually, I have friends who tell me that I should "get my card" because of my sleep problems, and I'd love to use something else to get off the Ambien once in a while, but that would require the Feds to stop violating California's right to legalize medical marijuana within its borders.

In the meantime, I'm not going to paint a target on my back.

Here's an idea: let's win the WoT and solve the energy crisis. Then we can concentrate on not just medical marijuana, but full decriminalization of everything short of heroin and crack—and maybe them, too. (The more we legalize, the more we can regulate, and the more street crime goes down as the prices drop. And the more we can get people into rehab if they get truly hooked, if simple using is not going to land them into our already overcrowded prisons all on its own.)

Posted by: Attila Girl at 09:10 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 163 words, total size 1 kb.

Is there a connection?

The fact is, I'm perfectly willing to pretend I'm afraid of carbon. The more people are afraid of AGW, the faster we can get some nice, clean nuclear power plants built. Yay!

Posted by: Attila Girl at 07:25 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 46 words, total size 1 kb.

. . . . Americans.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 10:52 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 7 words, total size 1 kb.

But in the good way.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 10:11 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 15 words, total size 1 kb.

"When you thought we said we were anti-drillin', we really meant that we were anti-illin'. We thought we were discussing health care—not energy."

Posted by: Attila Girl at 09:31 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 29 words, total size 1 kb.

Chris explains how that works.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 06:54 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 35 words, total size 1 kb.

I think Obama's racism was simply that he didn't want Clarence Thomas sitting on the High Court alongside two white women.

It was Obama's white side: he didn't want Thomas having designs on his wimmenfolk.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 06:43 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 49 words, total size 1 kb.

But I've been eating lotos flowers.

Why not?—I have a very long list of things to do tomorrow. *

Vaguely related: if we are going to legalize Romantic poetry, shouldn't we legalize Mary Jane?

Posted by: Attila Girl at 06:31 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 38 words, total size 1 kb.

(Not drowning; just waving. I swear.)

Posted by: Attila Girl at 01:04 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 24 words, total size 1 kb.

. . . the "Gang of Ten" proposal:

API must express its opposition to the approach outlined by the Group of 10 because it falls far short of what is needed.

Unfortunately, the proposal appears to be a classic case of one step forward, two steps back -- or in this instance "light on new production/heavy on new taxes." Current world events only reinforce the critical importance of ensuring that our nation develops the full range of its domestic energy resources for economic competitiveness and national security reasons.

The proposalÂ’s approach to access to federal oil and natural gas resources is far too limited in its scope. And, it is unfortunately paired with the imposition of at least $30 billion in new taxes on the oil and natural gas industry that would have the effect of limiting needed oil and gas investment. A lesson learned well in the 1970-80 period. These measures create an environment that will virtually assure a future with less, not more, domestic production.

While this new proposal would expand access in the waters of the Outer Continental Shelf, it unfortunately limits any expansion over current law to the eastern Gulf of Mexico and waters off four Atlantic Coast states in the South. Even in these areas, development in federal waters less than 50 miles offshore would be banned – despite the fact that offshore facilities would need to be 12 or fewer miles from shore to be visible from land.

Leasing in the North Atlantic and off the Pacific Coast would be banned and plentiful hydrocarbon resources in Alaska would remain off limits. Significant regulatory burdens on new development would remain in place. The imposition of $30 billion in clearly discriminatory new taxes, to pay for federal investment in alternatives and renewables, ignores the fact that the industry already provides more than 70 percent of all North American investment in research and development in emerging energy technologies.

Americans today are calling for Congress to do much more to supply their needs for additional energy. Our companies are supplying more energy – and more kinds of energy – to meet this growing demand. The U.S. Energy Information Administration continues to point out that oil and natural gas will be an essential part of this nation’s energy future for decades to come. Opening all available domestic resources to safe and environmentally responsible development would significantly boost U.S. supplies of oil and natural gas; increase the nation’s energy security; add more well-paying American jobs; help with our balance of payments and economic growth during a time of recessionary fears and bring billions of dollars into the Treasury instead of sending them abroad.

Huge and discriminatory new taxes on the U.S. oil and gas industry make no sense. The only beneficiaries of such an ill-advised approach would be international competitors in the global oil markets, who would benefit as US companies were made less competitive in the quest to find and develop global energy supplies. Already, the top 27 U.S. energy-producing companies have seen their annual tax liability rise to more than $100 billion, an 80-percent increase from 2004 to 2006. New taxes on these U.S.-based energy companies would drastically cut capital that otherwise could be invested in domestic oil and natural gas production and expanded refining capacity. The net result could be to stifle high-risk, capital-intensive projects in the U.S., leaving Americans more
dependent on foreign sources of energy, while jeopardizing U.S. jobs and economic growth.

Other than that, it's a great idea, you know. Read the entire text of the API Letter (it's a PDF), which was sent to all senators. We need a bill, but the GoT proposal ain't the one. And even one of the "DontGo" recommendations reportedly contains that "50 miles off shore" proviso for coastal development. That's at least twice of what's necessary for environmental safeguards. (Unless, perhaps, you're a yachting enthusiast; in that case, you might have to negotiate around the occasional oil platform that people on the beaches simply cannot see. Unless you get everywhere you go on sail-power alone—with no backup motor involved whatsoever—you might want to consider taking one for the team.)

The API site is here, by the way. They know their stuff, and because they have ties to the people out in the field who are doing the exploration and conducting the research on oil and natural gas, they can give much more pragmatic recommendations on how to solve the energy crisis in the short-term/medium-term, as we continue to work on alternative forms of fuel and creative ways to generate electricity.

So, let's be clear: having a relationship with the industry is a feature. Not a bug. But there's your disclosure, anyway. They are an invaluable think-tank and public information source on oil and natural gas, and we should listen to their input.

(If you're too much of a purist/anti-capitalist to do so. In that case, I assume you also ignore anything the American Booksellers Association has to say about the printed word.)

Posted by: Attila Girl at 02:51 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 841 words, total size 5 kb.

Ace has the full story, complete with blockquotes--the last paragraph of one showing the distinctive signs of Ace-tampering.

I just can't see the problem with drilling in ANWR (or the coasts, for that matter) given:

1) the high international stakes for failing to do so;
2) the fact that our environmental safeguards are more sophisticated than they were when we developed Prudhoe Bay (and some of the installations off the California coast);
3) given that the caribou in Prudhoe Bay seem perfectly happy and healthy anyway;
4) the fact that Americans seem to think it's fine to "despoil" the wilderness areas / oceans of other countries in order to attain the petroleum we still use on a daily basis (and in some of these cases these countries' environmental safeguards are so poor that the word despoil does not belong in quotes); and
5) the fact that Alaskans overwhelmingly want this to be done. They need the jobs; they really do.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 02:25 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 180 words, total size 1 kb.

After all, the fruit juice will wear off eventually, and then I'll get hungry. Then I truly won't be able to sleep unless I eat something, which is asking a bit much of my system.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 03:19 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 45 words, total size 1 kb.

Let's say you call someone from your cell phone. They ask for your zip code, but it's a different one from the billing address.

Can they find you?

Posted by: Attila Girl at 03:10 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 32 words, total size 1 kb.

Maybe this was their way of telling me not to invite myself out to dinner with them any more at the end of Siggraph: one guy showed up with his wife; they were discussing possible names for a baby. I suggested that rather than risk breaking their hearts, they should wait for a fetus before they got too excited about reproduction.

"Oh," my friend remarked. "You are out of the loop, aren't you?" His wife showed me her expanded belly, and he told me they were expecting in October.

So, which is more unbelievable: (1) the fact that my friend never thought to let me in on the fact that his wife was pregnant; or (2) the fact that none of my other friends, who surely knew about this, never thought to inform me or the other person in the dinner party who has suffered through infertility. (Of course, this other person may be on the brink of Marriage Number Three, so there is hope for him. For me, not so much.)

I mean, I could have been happy for them if it hadn't been thrown in my face so suddenly. Why didn't anyone drop me a hint about this?

Posted by: Attila Girl at 03:09 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 210 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Came upon your blog while surfing. I am new here and I don't mean to be rude or unsympathetic, but wouldn't it make more sense, as a friend, to be happy for your friend, regardless of how the information was relayed to you? Its likely to be far more rewarding, in the end, than holding your happiness hostage because you feel their good fortune somehow reflects negatively on you. Angela

Posted by: Angela Bateman at August 16, 2008 05:29 PM (1+w38)

2 Having been the "last to know" on several friends pregnancies, it comes off as you're just not that important. But they sure do double-time it to make sure I get the baby shower invites early and often. What I was taught is that friendship is a two-way street. Was I wrong, Angela? I don't really ask for much, just a little consideration.

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at August 17, 2008 08:03 AM (1hM1d)

3 No, no. Angela's right. If I have any negative emotions whatsoever, the healthy is to pretend that they do not exist. Because only bad people have negative emotions. To be a good person, one has to have only positive emotions. Look: I'm stoked that they are expecting. Really, really stoked. I just wish I'd been told, rather than having things unfold in a way that felt that humiliating. BTW, Angela, I'm going to take a flier, here: you've never suffered the pain of infertility.

Posted by: Attila Girl at August 17, 2008 12:27 PM (TpmQk)

4 Forgive me for being a totally f*-up hardass, but would you like a bit of ammunition for the next time round? If so, read on... ... my unmarried colleagues (yes, in the same chain of command, she reports indirectly to him) were expecting their child some 3-4 weeks ago. The baby was stillborn. Labour had to be induced 2 weeks ahead of schedule because the baby had died in the womb. Now, we're supposed to be a MNC (multinational company) and therefore sophisticated and cosmopolitan and allathat. I still found it shocking that they weren't married (but I don't say anything - not my business, really). And this sort of thing happens to people good or bad. But, anyways, if you really want to carve a pound of flesh out of the nest someone who's not all that sensitive to your plight, repeating the above story (in a smarmy, pseudo-friendly tone) might be the ticket. /like I said, f*ed-up hardass On a more serious note, may I point out the bystander effect? It may very well be they assumed you knew. Or did not see it of prime importance. I sometimes find out my 'friends' are married after I get an invite to their son's 'full-moon' (it's an Asian thing). My own sister did not want me to know she was seeing this boy until after the engagement and wedding dates had been set.

Posted by: Gregory at August 17, 2008 11:59 PM (cjwF0)

5 I found it heartbreaking and upsetting when, going in for a pre-op visit for an extremely necessary sterilization procedure I'd avoided for years, I was put in an examination room chock-full of photos of babies the doctor had delivered. Hundreds of them, washing over me in my time of sorrow. I wish they'd had a room more sensitive to how I was feeling and what I was going through. And I wish your friends had thought to tell you in a way you could process privately. Unfortunately, people (especially certain kinds of people, which includes logical types, socially awkward types, people who are happier than they'd expected to be, and sometimes guys) don't always remember that other people might feel differently about something, and might want some time to digest it. The adjective Considerate comes from the verb To Consider. An action not everyone engages in. Hang in there, sweetie! you're entitled to your feelings, and you're a good and lovely person. xo

Posted by: Rin at August 18, 2008 06:54 AM (4Mpxg)

6 I found it heartbreaking and upsetting when, going in for a pre-op visit for an extremely necessary sterilization procedure I'd avoided for years, I was put in an examination room chock-full of photos of babies the doctor had delivered. Hundreds of them, washing over me in my time of sorrow. I wish they'd had a room more sensitive to how I was feeling and what I was going through. And I wish your friends had thought to tell you in a way you could process privately. Unfortunately, people (especially certain kinds of people, which includes logical types, socially awkward types, people who are happier than they'd expected to be, and --sometimes-- guys) don't always remember that other people might feel differently about something, and might want some time to digest it. The adjective Considerate comes from the verb To Consider. An action not everyone engages in. Hang in there, sweetie! you're entitled to your feelings, and you're a good and lovely person. xo

Posted by: Rin at August 18, 2008 07:03 AM (4Mpxg)

7 Hi there! Sorry it took so long to respond to this but my access to the Internet is intermittent. Like you and others on this board, I too have had problems with fertility--which is what made your comment stick out to me. I under what is like to feel reminded of a lost possibilty. I remember what it was like in the first few years after my hystorectomy. It took me a good while to get used to the idea and no longer view the good fortunes of my friends as, first and foremost, a reminder of what I had lost. I remember feeling terribly bitter. Like I had failed in some way as a wife and as woman. Coupled with other frustrations in my life (my career was going nowhere at the time) and dissatisfactions in my marriage, I eventually realized I was being terribly unfair to both myself, my husband (now ex) and what few friends I'd had left at the time. But I was lucky. With support, I was better able to separate the fortunes of others from my own bad luck and find a different path towards the emotional and personal fulfillment I sought. In life, we sometimes have painful trials. I hope that, eventually, the bliss you deserve presents itself. I never suggested you were a bad person. Only that the good fortune of our friends should exist independent of our own misfortunes. At least on a good day. :-) Lord knows we all have bad ones sometimes. I guess I've just found it's usually helped me to try and put my best foot forward. Although, occasionally, it still ends up in my mouth. Angela B.

Posted by: angela bateman at August 19, 2008 07:28 AM (twnFD)

8 Alrighty, then.

Posted by: Attila Girl at August 19, 2008 11:47 AM (TpmQk)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Thought I'd check in.

Let me know how it's going.

I called my mother to check on the dog, who was sleeping peacefully—always a good thing at 3:00 a.m.

I called the people who talk about bad things. I said I was angry. The lady at the other end of line said I sounded more "hurt."

It's 4:00 a.m. right now. I'm just drinking fruit juice until such time as my body decides it can do something sleeplike. I'm hoping that's sooner, rather than later.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 02:59 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 99 words, total size 1 kb.

h/t: Ace.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 12:56 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 18 words, total size 1 kb.

Perhaps we should be—perhaps we are—working toward a "Blow Me, Russia" Alliance.

Something light and quick that pivots easily. Preferably, one that could also be used as a "Blow Me, Iran" force.

So, um. What are we doing for Ukraine?

Yeah. I'm still pissed. The only thing that could possibly lift me out of this funk is some nice domestic drilling. Um, I mean . . . . well, that would be nice, too. I'll enquire about that as well; they tell me there's a weekend coming up.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 12:47 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 96 words, total size 1 kb.

The "Gang of Ten" energy "compromise" gives up too much: politically, and as a practical matter.

There is a small, very wicked part of me that wants to ask Johnny Mac "how does it feel?"

Posted by: Attila Girl at 12:31 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 49 words, total size 1 kb.