(This is for those readers with whom I've developed a friendship. If you hate me or are just visiting, go ahead and ignore)
Job Interview Update -- Timeline:
3:30 PM PDT -- nerves begin to set in, constriction in throat.
4:00 -- Left work early to prepare for interview.
4:10 -- Arrived home, began began cleaning & changing for interview.
4:30 -- Combination of nerves and gag reflex conspire against me while brushing teeth -- toss cookies.
4:45 Manage to finish readying myself and head out for interview.
4:59 -- Arrive at interview location.
5:03 -- Begin pre-interview test.
5:15 -- Complete interview test. All the answers but one were easy, it I did not know.
5:16 -- Sit in waiting room, surrounded by people I recognize from work as better techs than I.
5:20 -- begin series of 3 short interviews with 2 supervisors each interview.
6:00 -- last interview ends. Am finall able to stop "holding it." Noone points to a door and says, "Go now and never darken our doors again!" This is on the surface a good sign, but I'm still not very confident in my odds. We'll see.
Monday, October 04, 2004
Because, Y'Know, We're Nazis....
Thanks for the Memory to Blogs For Bush.
Yup, more of the same. Right after I blog about intolerance in New Jersey, and then point out that it's at least not institutionalized, I am alerted to more evidence that it's increasingly rampant. In Madison, Wisconsin, a Bush supporter had his lawn vandalized -- and not just by having a sign stolen. This time, they used grass killer to burn a swastika into the yard.
But we're the Brownshirts. Riiiiiight....
Yup, more of the same. Right after I blog about intolerance in New Jersey, and then point out that it's at least not institutionalized, I am alerted to more evidence that it's increasingly rampant. In Madison, Wisconsin, a Bush supporter had his lawn vandalized -- and not just by having a sign stolen. This time, they used grass killer to burn a swastika into the yard.
But we're the Brownshirts. Riiiiiight....
Something Rotten In...
Well, in Sweden, actually, not in Denmark. but the Scandinavian connection still exists.
Thanks for the Memory to Beautiful Atrocities via Mean Mr. Mustard 2.0.
You all know how fond I am of documenting leftists oppressing conservatives in the name of Free Speech. Well, at least it's not as legislatively institutionalized here as it is in Sweden.
Yet.
Thanks for the Memory to Beautiful Atrocities via Mean Mr. Mustard 2.0.
You all know how fond I am of documenting leftists oppressing conservatives in the name of Free Speech. Well, at least it's not as legislatively institutionalized here as it is in Sweden.
Yet.
Thar She Blows II
Thanks for the Memory to Rusty at MyPetJawa.
This is an update to my previous Mt. St. Helens post.
She blew again today, but so far it looks like just another steam & gas venting -- not the big one they're expecting. Rusty is covering this well, and has the live video feed on his blog.
Cascade Range volcanoes vary in type. St. Helens is a stratovolcano, and has a tendency towards pyroclastic events.
Rusty and his Washingtonian blogger pal Duane the Forester have better ongoing coverage of this, but if she really goes on us, I'll post the local reaction as best I can. I'm about 150 miles south of St. Helens, so unless there's a lot of ash, I probably won't be affected.
This is an update to my previous Mt. St. Helens post.
She blew again today, but so far it looks like just another steam & gas venting -- not the big one they're expecting. Rusty is covering this well, and has the live video feed on his blog.
Cascade Range volcanoes vary in type. St. Helens is a stratovolcano, and has a tendency towards pyroclastic events.
Rusty and his Washingtonian blogger pal Duane the Forester have better ongoing coverage of this, but if she really goes on us, I'll post the local reaction as best I can. I'm about 150 miles south of St. Helens, so unless there's a lot of ash, I probably won't be affected.
Can You Picture That?
Thanks for the Memory to Drudge via Vices and Virtues.
My friend Ricky V has clued me in to the most idiotic case yet of leftist persecution of a conservative. It may not be the most violent, or illegal, or mean-spirited, but it is without a doubt the stupidest.
A school teacher in New Jersey has taken flak for displaying a picture of President Bush. You may ask why this is persecution, since a teacher should not be using her classroom as a bully pulpit (no left-leaning teacher would ever do that, right?). Well the catch is, she posted pictures of ALL the US Presidents as part of a civics display in her classroom.
No matter what you think of Bush, he *IS* the President, and including him in such a display is appropriate. I would expect to find a picture of Clinton in the same display. and lo and behold, there was, if the article is accurate.
But that wasn't good enough for the parents. Three of them confronted her, demanding that she display a picture of Kerry as well. That's a bit premature, and not necessarily a given, wouldn't you say? According to the article, when she refused, she got in trouble with her vice principle.
This is getting old. I'm glad for once that, according to the article, some of the parents are standing up for her. I'll try to keep up on this article, and if anyone else learns anything new, please pass it on to me.
My friend Ricky V has clued me in to the most idiotic case yet of leftist persecution of a conservative. It may not be the most violent, or illegal, or mean-spirited, but it is without a doubt the stupidest.
A school teacher in New Jersey has taken flak for displaying a picture of President Bush. You may ask why this is persecution, since a teacher should not be using her classroom as a bully pulpit (no left-leaning teacher would ever do that, right?). Well the catch is, she posted pictures of ALL the US Presidents as part of a civics display in her classroom.
No matter what you think of Bush, he *IS* the President, and including him in such a display is appropriate. I would expect to find a picture of Clinton in the same display. and lo and behold, there was, if the article is accurate.
But that wasn't good enough for the parents. Three of them confronted her, demanding that she display a picture of Kerry as well. That's a bit premature, and not necessarily a given, wouldn't you say? According to the article, when she refused, she got in trouble with her vice principle.
This is getting old. I'm glad for once that, according to the article, some of the parents are standing up for her. I'll try to keep up on this article, and if anyone else learns anything new, please pass it on to me.
Touching a Soft Spot
The latest Strengthen the Good microcharity has been posted, and for obvious reeasons, I'm all for it. The charity is called Garden of Angels. It is run by a woman named Debi Faris, and it provides names and proper burials for the bodies of abandoned infants. She also actively lobbies for laws to help prevent such deaths from occurring.
Given my wife's pregnancy, I am more acutely sensitive to the welfare of the unborn and infants than I ever was before. I really cannot say anything more in praise of this charity, I think it speaks for itself. Please check out their website, or read more about them at Strengthen the Good, and if you can, please give.
Thanks for listening.
Given my wife's pregnancy, I am more acutely sensitive to the welfare of the unborn and infants than I ever was before. I really cannot say anything more in praise of this charity, I think it speaks for itself. Please check out their website, or read more about them at Strengthen the Good, and if you can, please give.
Thanks for listening.
Confessions of a Sap
For all my political conservatism, for all my distrust of big government's ability to provide for us, for all my disdain for the welfare state and my belief that entitlement is actually disablement, I am in the end very softhearted. I'm willing to spend my OWN money to help those who are in need, and I'm easily moved by genuine displays of generosity and mercy.
Which is why I love my new favorite TV show, Extreme Makeover: Home Edition. I haven't made it dry-eyed through a single episode yet. Last night's was no exception -- I was "complaining about the air quality" by the first commercial break. The family who received the new home was a shining example of the kind of people they choose -- people who are doing their best to pull their own weight, and even help others, but against whom circumstances have conspired. They were parents of four, and when his mother was killed by a stray bullet in a gang shootout in east LA, he took in his five minor siblings.
There are a couple of things about the show that really warm my heart. First of all, the families almost uniformly come across with the right attitude -- they ask very nicely in their videos, and they are grateful to those who help them in the end. This is at the heart of true compassion -- helping people because they need and ask, not because they feel entitled and demand. Furthermore, I appreciate deeply the amount of volunteer work they use in the construction crews, and the fact that big businesses like Sears and Shea Homes pitch in to help, and the fact that ABC and their sponsors do it on their own dime. Sure, they get tons of really good publicity for it, but considering the good they accomplish, more power to them. I know I for one plan to do business at Sears as much as possible (and for one more reason to do so, see my post on how well they treat their employees in the Guard and Reserve.
Finally, as I've already stated, I love the fact that almost all of the people they help are people who are doing their best to make it and to help others. When you see how hard they work to keep the dumps their homes are before the makeover, you get the feeling that these are people who won't squander this wonderful gift.
So, yeah, I'm a pushover and a sap and a wimp, but I don't care. Ty and his crew are my heroes.
Which is why I love my new favorite TV show, Extreme Makeover: Home Edition. I haven't made it dry-eyed through a single episode yet. Last night's was no exception -- I was "complaining about the air quality" by the first commercial break. The family who received the new home was a shining example of the kind of people they choose -- people who are doing their best to pull their own weight, and even help others, but against whom circumstances have conspired. They were parents of four, and when his mother was killed by a stray bullet in a gang shootout in east LA, he took in his five minor siblings.
There are a couple of things about the show that really warm my heart. First of all, the families almost uniformly come across with the right attitude -- they ask very nicely in their videos, and they are grateful to those who help them in the end. This is at the heart of true compassion -- helping people because they need and ask, not because they feel entitled and demand. Furthermore, I appreciate deeply the amount of volunteer work they use in the construction crews, and the fact that big businesses like Sears and Shea Homes pitch in to help, and the fact that ABC and their sponsors do it on their own dime. Sure, they get tons of really good publicity for it, but considering the good they accomplish, more power to them. I know I for one plan to do business at Sears as much as possible (and for one more reason to do so, see my post on how well they treat their employees in the Guard and Reserve.
Finally, as I've already stated, I love the fact that almost all of the people they help are people who are doing their best to make it and to help others. When you see how hard they work to keep the dumps their homes are before the makeover, you get the feeling that these are people who won't squander this wonderful gift.
So, yeah, I'm a pushover and a sap and a wimp, but I don't care. Ty and his crew are my heroes.
Saturday, October 02, 2004
Recipe Time
Well, with the fall weather getting cool, I decided it's time to post a recipe that matches the weather.
This is a variation on Beef Bourgognon that I developed to highlight as many Oregon food products as possible. Anywhere I've listed an Oregon ingredient, you can use your local equivalent.
Beef Oregon
1 tablespoon olive oil (I'd use Oregon filbert oil if anyone pressed & sold it)
8 ounces dry cured center cut smoked bacon, diced
2 1/2 pounds chuck beef cut into 1-inch cubes
Kosher salt
Freshly ground black pepper
1 pound carrots, sliced diagonally into 1-inch chunks
1 Bunch celery, leaves on
2 Hood River yellow onions, sliced
2 teaspoons chopped garlic (2 cloves)
1 (750 ml.) bottle good Oregon Pinot Noir
1 can (2 cups) beef broth
2 teaspoons fresh thyme leaves (1 teaspoon dried)
1 teaspoon fresh rosemary leaves (1/2 teaspoon dried)
1 Oregon myrtlewood leaf (use a bay leaf if you don’t have myrtlewood)
4 tablespoons Tillamook unsalted butter at room temperature,
divided
3 tablespoons all-purpose flour
1 pound fresh Oregon mushrooms stems discarded, caps thickly sliced
For serving:
6 Oregon russet potatoes
6 sprigs fresh rosemary
Preheat the oven to 250 degrees F.
Cut the russet potatoes into quarters, keeping each potato together after it is cut. Lightly butter the cut sides, sprinkle half of the thyme on. Put the quarters back together, and wrap in foil.
Cut the leaves off of the celery. Finely chop the leaves and the stalks, but keep separate.
Heat the oil in a large Dutch oven. Add the bacon and cook over medium heat for 10 minutes, stirring occasionally, until the bacon is lightly browned. Remove the bacon with a slotted spoon to a large plate.
Dry the beef cubes with paper towels and then sprinkle them with salt and pepper. In batches in single layers, sear the beef in the hot oil for 3 to 5 minutes, turning to brown on all sides. Remove the seared cubes to the plate with the bacon and continue searing until all the beef is browned. Set aside.
Toss the carrots, celery stalks, and onions, 1 tablespoon of salt and 2 teaspoons of pepper in the fat in the pan and cook for 10 to 15 minutes, stirring occasionally, until the onions are lightly browned. Add the garlic and cook for 1 minute. Put the meat and bacon back into the pot with the juices. Add the bottle of wine plus enough beef broth to almost cover the meat. Add the myrtlewood leaf, rosemary, celery leaves, and the rest of the thyme. Bring to a simmer, cover the pot with a tight-fitting lid and place it in the oven for about 1 1/4 hours or until the meat and vegetables are very tender when pierced with a fork. Put the potatoes in the oven at the same time as the Dutch oven.
Combine 2 tablespoon of butter and the flour with a fork and stir into the stew. Sauté the mushrooms in 2 tablespoon of butter for 10 minutes until lightly browned and then add to the stew. Bring the stew to a boil on top of the stove, then lower the heat and simmer for 15 minutes. Season to taste.
To serve, spoon the stew over the potatos and garnish with rosemary sprigs.
I'm looking for a good beer bread recipe to substitute for the potatoes, but until I find one, this will have to do.
I would also recommend that you purchase 2 bottles of the same vintage of pinot noir, use one in the recipe and serve the other with it.
This is a variation on Beef Bourgognon that I developed to highlight as many Oregon food products as possible. Anywhere I've listed an Oregon ingredient, you can use your local equivalent.
Beef Oregon
1 tablespoon olive oil (I'd use Oregon filbert oil if anyone pressed & sold it)
8 ounces dry cured center cut smoked bacon, diced
2 1/2 pounds chuck beef cut into 1-inch cubes
Kosher salt
Freshly ground black pepper
1 pound carrots, sliced diagonally into 1-inch chunks
1 Bunch celery, leaves on
2 Hood River yellow onions, sliced
2 teaspoons chopped garlic (2 cloves)
1 (750 ml.) bottle good Oregon Pinot Noir
1 can (2 cups) beef broth
2 teaspoons fresh thyme leaves (1 teaspoon dried)
1 teaspoon fresh rosemary leaves (1/2 teaspoon dried)
1 Oregon myrtlewood leaf (use a bay leaf if you don’t have myrtlewood)
4 tablespoons Tillamook unsalted butter at room temperature,
divided
3 tablespoons all-purpose flour
1 pound fresh Oregon mushrooms stems discarded, caps thickly sliced
For serving:
6 Oregon russet potatoes
6 sprigs fresh rosemary
Preheat the oven to 250 degrees F.
Cut the russet potatoes into quarters, keeping each potato together after it is cut. Lightly butter the cut sides, sprinkle half of the thyme on. Put the quarters back together, and wrap in foil.
Cut the leaves off of the celery. Finely chop the leaves and the stalks, but keep separate.
Heat the oil in a large Dutch oven. Add the bacon and cook over medium heat for 10 minutes, stirring occasionally, until the bacon is lightly browned. Remove the bacon with a slotted spoon to a large plate.
Dry the beef cubes with paper towels and then sprinkle them with salt and pepper. In batches in single layers, sear the beef in the hot oil for 3 to 5 minutes, turning to brown on all sides. Remove the seared cubes to the plate with the bacon and continue searing until all the beef is browned. Set aside.
Toss the carrots, celery stalks, and onions, 1 tablespoon of salt and 2 teaspoons of pepper in the fat in the pan and cook for 10 to 15 minutes, stirring occasionally, until the onions are lightly browned. Add the garlic and cook for 1 minute. Put the meat and bacon back into the pot with the juices. Add the bottle of wine plus enough beef broth to almost cover the meat. Add the myrtlewood leaf, rosemary, celery leaves, and the rest of the thyme. Bring to a simmer, cover the pot with a tight-fitting lid and place it in the oven for about 1 1/4 hours or until the meat and vegetables are very tender when pierced with a fork. Put the potatoes in the oven at the same time as the Dutch oven.
Combine 2 tablespoon of butter and the flour with a fork and stir into the stew. Sauté the mushrooms in 2 tablespoon of butter for 10 minutes until lightly browned and then add to the stew. Bring the stew to a boil on top of the stove, then lower the heat and simmer for 15 minutes. Season to taste.
To serve, spoon the stew over the potatos and garnish with rosemary sprigs.
I'm looking for a good beer bread recipe to substitute for the potatoes, but until I find one, this will have to do.
I would also recommend that you purchase 2 bottles of the same vintage of pinot noir, use one in the recipe and serve the other with it.
The Littlest B
The Feared Redhead had an ultrasound last Monday. I finally had a chance to scan the printouts:
I think it's the sweetest thing I've ever seen in my life. But I'm admittedly biased -- bear in mind, half it's DNA is from me. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
If it's a girl, I am renaming my 12-gauge "The Chaperone".
I think it's the sweetest thing I've ever seen in my life. But I'm admittedly biased -- bear in mind, half it's DNA is from me. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
If it's a girl, I am renaming my 12-gauge "The Chaperone".
Friday, October 01, 2004
Same Old Tired Theme
*SIGH*
I blog on this theme so often, that I've gone from outrage to resigned disgust. It's happened again. It's happened here in the Pacific Northwest again. And this time, I think even Venom can agree, it's a bit more significant that my bumper sticker. I am, of course, talking about Republicans being victimized by the very behavior they are accused of by the Left.
Thanks for the Memory to Powerline via Ace of Spades HQ.
According to the Seattle Times, The Washington state headquarters for the president's re-election campaign was broken into last night, and police are investigating the theft of three computers from the Bellevue office.
Now, on the face of it, that means nothing. Burglaries happen all the time, even to politicians. But the particulars of the case lend themselves to arousing suspicion: The burglars didn't steal all the computers, just a few. And they were very specific:
Missing are laptop computers used by the campaign's executive director, the head of the get-out-the-vote effort and one that had been set for delivery to the campaign's Southwest Washington field director, said Jon Seaton, executive director of the state's George W. Bush campaign.
....
State Republican Party Chairman Chris Vance called it a "Watergate-style break in" and said he suspects Democrats are behind it.
"If you're just some burglar looking for computers to sell to buy drugs you take every laptop in the office maybe," he said. "But they knew exactly whose computers to get. They got the executive director's computer and the get-out-the-vote director's computer."
Of course, the Democrats are denying any involvement. And while there's no reason to believe the incident was orchestrated by Democrats, it seems apparent that whoever did this was politically motivated and knew exactly what they were looking for.
I blog on this theme so often, that I've gone from outrage to resigned disgust. It's happened again. It's happened here in the Pacific Northwest again. And this time, I think even Venom can agree, it's a bit more significant that my bumper sticker. I am, of course, talking about Republicans being victimized by the very behavior they are accused of by the Left.
Thanks for the Memory to Powerline via Ace of Spades HQ.
According to the Seattle Times, The Washington state headquarters for the president's re-election campaign was broken into last night, and police are investigating the theft of three computers from the Bellevue office.
Now, on the face of it, that means nothing. Burglaries happen all the time, even to politicians. But the particulars of the case lend themselves to arousing suspicion: The burglars didn't steal all the computers, just a few. And they were very specific:
Missing are laptop computers used by the campaign's executive director, the head of the get-out-the-vote effort and one that had been set for delivery to the campaign's Southwest Washington field director, said Jon Seaton, executive director of the state's George W. Bush campaign.
....
State Republican Party Chairman Chris Vance called it a "Watergate-style break in" and said he suspects Democrats are behind it.
"If you're just some burglar looking for computers to sell to buy drugs you take every laptop in the office maybe," he said. "But they knew exactly whose computers to get. They got the executive director's computer and the get-out-the-vote director's computer."
Of course, the Democrats are denying any involvement. And while there's no reason to believe the incident was orchestrated by Democrats, it seems apparent that whoever did this was politically motivated and knew exactly what they were looking for.
Thar She Blows
AP Photo
Mount St. Helens Awakes, Erupting Steam and Ash
By Tom Banse
MOUNT ST. HELENS NATIONAL VOLCANIC MONUMENT (Reuters) - Mount St. Helens spewed steam and gray ash from a small explosive eruption in its crater on Friday, as the volcano in Washington state awoke from its slumber for the first time in nearly two decades.
A plume rose in a column from the crater just after 12 p.m. PDT in the first eruption since 1986, but was well below the scale of the catastrophic 1980 eruption that blew off the top of the mountain and spread ash across North America.
"This is exactly the kind of thing we've been forecasting to happen, which is a small steam and ash explosion that could send things up several tens of thousand feet above the rim of Mount St. Helens," said Cynthia Gardner, seismologist for the U.S. Geological Survey (news - web sites), "How long it will last we don't know."
A team of geologists was installing equipment in the crater of the volcano, and the U.S. Geological Survey said they were trying to determine how safe they were.
The plume of steam and ash was being carried to the northwest by the wind over uninhabited areas, said Peter Frenzen, a U.S. Forestry Service official.
There were several hundred witnesses at the Johnston Ridge Observatory, but they did not report hearing any loud explosions.
Earlier on Friday, government scientists reported that the lava dome created after the 1980 eruption had swollen slightly slightly and that cracks appeared on the glacier inside the rumbling volcano's crater.
The 1980 eruption killed 57 people, destroyed more than 200 homes and devastated hundreds of square miles of surrounding land. Ash from that outpouring billowed across the continent and was carried as far east as Oklahoma.
Recent activity, which started with a series of small earthquakes a week ago and a 2.5-inch shift in the lava dome's location, is happening within the horseshoe-shaped crater that formed after the eruption.
Government scientists and officials said that the main concern was whether a plume of ash would form and interfere with air traffic.
Mount St. Helens is in southeastern Washington, about 100 miles south of Seattle and 50 miles north of Oregon's largest city, Portland.
Air traffic officials said they were on alert and prepared to divert air traffic in case of an ash-spewing eruption.
Seismologists said there was no connection between activity at Mount St. Helens and a strong earthquake near Parkfield, California or a smaller series of quakes in Alaska earlier this week.
The violent eruption of Mount St. Helens on May 18, 1980, blew off the top of the volcano, reducing its summit from 9,677 feet to 8,364 feet.
In addition to the 1986 eruption of the mountain's lava dome, strong earthquakes were detected in 1989, when fresh magma entered the volcano's lava system.
(Additional reporting by Allan Dowd in Vancouver, B.C.)
A northwesterly flow coupled with a weak section of the jet stream means we may get some ash here in Eugene, if it hangs in the air long enough. We'll see.
UPDATE:
I may live in the region, but Rusty at MyPetJawa has better blog coverage of the event.
My mom emailed me with the news. She was recalling the 1980 eruption, when ash fell in our small town in Idaho, several hundred miles to the east, and the sky turned blood red. It was eerie.
UPDATE 2:
The Following is a Sever Weather Alert for Eugene issued by the NWS:
CASCADE FOOTHILLS IN LANE COUNTY-CASCADES IN LANE COUNTY-CENTRAL COAST RANGE OF WESTERN OREGON-CENTRAL OREGON COAST-CENTRAL WILLAMETTE VALLEY-COAST RANGE OF NORTHWEST OREGON-GREATER PORTLAND METRO AREA-GREATER VANCOUVER AREA-LOWER COLUMBIA-
LOWER COLUMBIA AND I - 5 CORRIDOR IN COWLITZ COUNTY-NORTH OREGON COAST-NORTHERN OREGON CASCADE FOOTHILLS-NORTHERN OREGON CASCADES-SOUTH WILLAMETTE VALLEY-SOUTH WASHINGTON CASCADE FOOTHILLS-SOUTH WASHINGTON CASCADES-SOUTH WASHINGTON COAST-WESTERN COLUMBIA RIVER GORGE-WILLAPA HILLS-INCLUDING THE CITIES OF...ALBANY... ASTORIA... BATTLE GROUND... CASCADE LOCKS... CASTLE ROCK... CATHLAMET... COLDWATER RIDGE VISITORS CENTER... CORVALLIS... COUGAR... DALLAS... DETROIT... DOWNTOWN PORTLAND... DOWNTOWNVANCOUVER... EUGENE... FLORENCE... FRANCES... GOVERNMENT CAMP... GRANDE RONDE... HILLSBORO... HOOD RIVER... JEWELL... LONGVIEW... LOWELL... MANZANITA... MAPLETON... MCKENZIE BRIDGE... MCMINNVILLE... MILL CITY... MOUNT ST. HELENS... NEWPORT... OAKRIDGE... OREGON CITY... RAYMOND... SALEM... SANDY... ST. HELENS... STEVENSON... SWEET HOME... TILLAMOOK... TOUTLE... VERNONIA AND VIDA
1018 AM PDT FRI OCT 1 2004
...WINDS ALOFT FORECAST FOR MOUNT ST. HELENS FOR PLANNING PURPOSES...
SYNOPSIS...A STRONG UPPER HIGH WAS OVER THE EASTERN PACIFIC OCEAN THIS MORNING...AND WILL SLOWLY MOVE ONSHORE AND OVER THE REGION THROUGH THE WEEKEND. THE LOW LEVEL WIND FLOW IS OFFSHORE THIS MORNING...BUT WILL WEAKEN THIS WEEKEND AS THE UPPER HIGH MOVES OVERHEAD. THE CURRENT NORTHERLY UPPER LEVEL WIND WILL WEAKEN THIS WEEKEND. A MARINE LAYER WILL DEVELOP ALONG THE COAST THROUGH SATURDAY AND SPREAD INLAND THROUGH THE COASTAL GAPS LATER THIS WEEKEND AND EARLY NEXT WEEK. THE UPPER RIDGE SHOWS SIGNS OF WEAKENING THE MIDDLE OF NEXT WEEK WITH A WEAK FRONT POSSIBLE TUESDAY WITH ADDITIONAL SYSTEMS LATER IN THE WEEK.
ELEVATIONS BELOW ARE HEIGHTS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL. MT. ST. HELENS CRATER FLOOR IS AT 6279 FT. WIND FORECASTS BELOW 6279 FT APPLY TO NEARBY LOWER ELEVATIONS.
WIND DIRECTIONS ARE BASED ON TRUE NORTH AND ARE THE DIRECTION THE WIND IS BLOWING FROM. WIND SPEEDS ARE IN MILES PER HOUR. EXAMPLE...36005...REPRESENTS A WIND FROM 360 DEGREES AT 05 MPH.
MORNING SALEM BALLOON SOUNDING
ELEV 10/01 0500PDT
3000 08008
6000 11004
9000 20004
12000 31006
18000 36023
24000 35027
30000 35028
34000 34016
39000 33031
FORECAST WINDS ALOFT
ELEV.
UPDATE 3:
Weather Channel Animated Feed of Most Recent Satellite coverage of the PNW. So far the eruption barely shows as anything on the map -- a tiny speck of gray just a bit NE of Portland. Nothing compared to '80. We'll see if it pumps enough ash to even show up.
UPDATE 4:
Rusty links to a Live Feed from KGW-TV/DT Portland & KING-TV/DT Seattle.
How Long?
I love my mom. She's a great lady, she has very deep convictions, and like every mom, she really really wants to help. So she's always sending me emails about the election, the war in Iraq, etc. A lot of it I don't blog on because it's already pretty well-disseminated. Some I don't because I can't verify the facts. But this time I'm going to. Well, at least in part. She sent me an interesting email regarding Iraq and the Bible:
IRAQ - VERY INTERESTING - DID YOU KNOW?
1. The garden of Eden was in Iraq.
2. Mesopotamia, which is now Iraq, was the cradle of civilization!
3. Noah built the ark in Iraq.
4. The Tower of Babel was in Iraq.
5. Abraham was from Ur, which is in Southern Iraq!
6. Isaac's wife Rebekah is from Nahor, which is in Iraq.
7. Jacob met Rachel in Iraq.
8. Jonah preached in Nineveh - which is in Iraq.
9. Assyria, which is in Iraq, conquered the ten tribes of Israel.
10. Amos cried out in Iraq!
11. Babylon, which is in Iraq, destroyed Jerusalem.
12. Daniel was in the lion's den in Iraq!
13. The three Hebrew children were in the fire in Iraq (Jesus had been in Iraq also as the fourth person in the fiery furnace!)
14. Belshazzar, the King of Babylon saw the "writing on the wall" in Iraq.
15. Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, carried the Jews captive into Iraq.
16. Ezekiel preached in Iraq.
17. The wise men were from Iraq.
18. Peter preached in Iraq.
19. The "Empire of Man" described in Revelation is called Babylon,which was a city in Iraq!
And you have probably seen this one. Israel is the nation most often mentioned in the Bible. But do you know which nation is second? It is Iraq! However, that is not the name that is used in the Bible. The names used in the Bible are Babylon, Land of Shinar, and Mesopotamia. The word Mesopotamia means between the two rivers, more exactly between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. The name Iraq, means country with deep roots.
Indeed Iraq is a country with deep roots and is a very significant country in the Bible. No other nation, except Israel, has more history and prophecy associated it than Iraq.
The email goes on to make some observations regarding the current conflict and certainpassages in the Koran, but since I'm not a Muslim, and cannot confirm the accuracy of the observation, I will leave it out.
This is all just an introduction to my actual point, however. But since I intend to quote the Bible to emphasize the actual point, I thought it would be interesting.
I watched the debate last night. I've posted on other threads on other blogs regarding how I think it went, so I won't here. What I do want to comment on is a comment by John Kerry, which was echoed today in another reader's comment to another blog. The comment was that while Kerry acknowledges the need to eliminate Saddam Hussein, he felt that Bush failed to exhaust all diplomatic options, and that he should have waited longer to use the military option.
My response is to ask of Kerry and all those who make this argument, the same thing many a prophet in the Old Testament asked God:
Habakkuk 1:2 O LORD, how long shall I cry for help, and thou wilt not hear? Or cry to thee "Violence!" and thou wilt not save?
How long? How much longer should we have let the sanctions work? How many more UN Resolutions? Months? Years? 1 resolution? 10? 100? Given what we know about the Oil for Food corruption, do you think he really would have cracked? And if they didn't work then, then what? Would you honestly then suupport military action? If not, would we have lifted sanctions? And what response from Saddam would have been considered satisfactory? If he complied with inspections, and then the UN lifted sanctions, and he started all over again, then what?
I'm just asking.
IRAQ - VERY INTERESTING - DID YOU KNOW?
1. The garden of Eden was in Iraq.
2. Mesopotamia, which is now Iraq, was the cradle of civilization!
3. Noah built the ark in Iraq.
4. The Tower of Babel was in Iraq.
5. Abraham was from Ur, which is in Southern Iraq!
6. Isaac's wife Rebekah is from Nahor, which is in Iraq.
7. Jacob met Rachel in Iraq.
8. Jonah preached in Nineveh - which is in Iraq.
9. Assyria, which is in Iraq, conquered the ten tribes of Israel.
10. Amos cried out in Iraq!
11. Babylon, which is in Iraq, destroyed Jerusalem.
12. Daniel was in the lion's den in Iraq!
13. The three Hebrew children were in the fire in Iraq (Jesus had been in Iraq also as the fourth person in the fiery furnace!)
14. Belshazzar, the King of Babylon saw the "writing on the wall" in Iraq.
15. Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, carried the Jews captive into Iraq.
16. Ezekiel preached in Iraq.
17. The wise men were from Iraq.
18. Peter preached in Iraq.
19. The "Empire of Man" described in Revelation is called Babylon,which was a city in Iraq!
And you have probably seen this one. Israel is the nation most often mentioned in the Bible. But do you know which nation is second? It is Iraq! However, that is not the name that is used in the Bible. The names used in the Bible are Babylon, Land of Shinar, and Mesopotamia. The word Mesopotamia means between the two rivers, more exactly between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. The name Iraq, means country with deep roots.
Indeed Iraq is a country with deep roots and is a very significant country in the Bible. No other nation, except Israel, has more history and prophecy associated it than Iraq.
The email goes on to make some observations regarding the current conflict and certainpassages in the Koran, but since I'm not a Muslim, and cannot confirm the accuracy of the observation, I will leave it out.
This is all just an introduction to my actual point, however. But since I intend to quote the Bible to emphasize the actual point, I thought it would be interesting.
I watched the debate last night. I've posted on other threads on other blogs regarding how I think it went, so I won't here. What I do want to comment on is a comment by John Kerry, which was echoed today in another reader's comment to another blog. The comment was that while Kerry acknowledges the need to eliminate Saddam Hussein, he felt that Bush failed to exhaust all diplomatic options, and that he should have waited longer to use the military option.
My response is to ask of Kerry and all those who make this argument, the same thing many a prophet in the Old Testament asked God:
Habakkuk 1:2 O LORD, how long shall I cry for help, and thou wilt not hear? Or cry to thee "Violence!" and thou wilt not save?
How long? How much longer should we have let the sanctions work? How many more UN Resolutions? Months? Years? 1 resolution? 10? 100? Given what we know about the Oil for Food corruption, do you think he really would have cracked? And if they didn't work then, then what? Would you honestly then suupport military action? If not, would we have lifted sanctions? And what response from Saddam would have been considered satisfactory? If he complied with inspections, and then the UN lifted sanctions, and he started all over again, then what?
I'm just asking.
Best News in Months
Anyone who knows me personally knows that I'm being laid off in a week. Well, I finally got a call back for an interview. It's for a company that manufactures a product that used to be manufactured by the company my call center now supports, so there's a bit of an inside track. Wish me luck!
UPDATE:
Well, phone tag didn't last long. I called the recruiter, left a message, and got a call back within ten minutes. I'm scheduled to interview on Monday. Here's the best part: If I get the job, I start training on the 11th, after being laid off on the 8th. I would qualify for my severance pay from the old job and go right to the new one without missing a day of work.
UPDATE:
Well, phone tag didn't last long. I called the recruiter, left a message, and got a call back within ten minutes. I'm scheduled to interview on Monday. Here's the best part: If I get the job, I start training on the 11th, after being laid off on the 8th. I would qualify for my severance pay from the old job and go right to the new one without missing a day of work.
Thursday, September 30, 2004
They Just Don't Learn!
This story just keeps getting better. And now there are other stories in the sam vein. Read it again, then read the updates.
Originally Posted 10:00 AM September 29, 2004
Thanks for the Memory to Ace of Spades HQ.
OK, I've been trying to find my own material on which to blog, but this one is just so ridiculous, I have to chime in.
One of the hallmarks of intelligence, I am told, is the ability to learn from one's mistakes -- to recognize a causitive relationship between an action and its consequences, and to choose to refrain from that action in the future in order to avoid those consequences.
Let's take a recent example of an action and its consequences, and see if WE can learn anything from them, shall we?
One of the... no, THE biggest story in the blogosphere in recent weeks has been "Memogate," the controversy surrounding Dan Rathers' 60 Minutes story on President Bush's service record and the falsified records used to support the story. I won't link to the story, it's so thoroughly blogged that it's ridiculous.
So what lessons can we learn from this, children (or "Rather," what lessons should CBS have learned)? Specifically, what action and consequences should CBS have observed and avoided in the future? Allow me to make a few suggestions:
The first observation in general is that there are people who are so devoted to their political cause that they are willing to lie and even commit forgery in order to advance their cause. We have also learned that while they are supposed to be impartial and dedicated to verifying the accuracy of their reporting, the mainstream media is at times willing to overlook niggling little concerns regarding their sources in order to get a story out if that story supports their own opinions or beliefs. In the case of the CBS story, that included both the use of forged documents, as well as a reliance on "unimpeachable sources" that have proven to be highly partisan individuals. That is the Action.
The consequences are that in the age of blogs, if you rely on verifiably untrue sources, the odds are very great that you will be caught, exposed, and discredited.
The Lesson, then, would be? Anyone? Anyone? /Ben Stein
The Lesson is to VERIFY your information before REPORTING it.
So let's take the lesson learned and apply it to another story that's been making the rounds and has garnered a lot of attention: The Draft Controversy. There's been an email circulating warning people that the government, and specifically the Bush administration, plans to reinstate the draft in order to recruit troops for Iraq. It has generated a lot of ill will towards the President, and I even read a very angry letter about it in Sunday's Portland Oregonian.
There's only one problem: The email is lying. As a matter of fact, as the FactCheck article points out, only two draft-related bills have been proposed, both were sponsored by Democrats, both were prior to Iraq, and both were stillborn.
So let's take our lesson learned and apply it to this email. IF you were a journalist -- no, if you were a CBS Journalist, how would you approach this issue?
I think you see where I'm going with this. That's right, CBS failed to learn its lesson. Furthermore, not only did they rely on an already debunked document (this time an email), they also quoted a highly partisan source. they just didn't learn.
I don't know what you'd call this -- Hubris, desperation for a story, blind devotion to a cause, or just plain stupidity. But the one thing you can't call this, by the standard established at the beginning of this post, is intelligence.
UPDATE!
Again, credit goes toAce of Spades HQ. The man's en fuego.
Bill at INDC has interviewed several representatives of CBS regarding this story. Read the whole report here.
One exchange that caught many readers' eyes, as well as my own, was this one:
INDC: "Probably the main concern with the story is that the e-mails that are shown in the piece are false; they've been debunked on various internet sites long ago ..."
Schlesinger: "The fact is, they were going around. I know several people that got them, and it’s gotten people all riled up. Whether or not there’s any reality to there being a draft, is almost besides the point. Do I think there’s going to be a draft? No. But it's an issue that people are talking about."
In other words (and I wasn't the first or only to pick up on this), "The documents are not authentic, but they're accurate)" Furthermore, if people are riled up because of false information, why, as has been asked, is CBS reporting on how upset people are, instead of letting them know how unfounded their reason for being upset is? Why are they reporting that people are afraid because of a lie, and not on the fact that it's a lie?
They Just Don't Learn.
Originally Posted 10:00 AM September 29, 2004
Thanks for the Memory to Ace of Spades HQ.
OK, I've been trying to find my own material on which to blog, but this one is just so ridiculous, I have to chime in.
One of the hallmarks of intelligence, I am told, is the ability to learn from one's mistakes -- to recognize a causitive relationship between an action and its consequences, and to choose to refrain from that action in the future in order to avoid those consequences.
Let's take a recent example of an action and its consequences, and see if WE can learn anything from them, shall we?
One of the... no, THE biggest story in the blogosphere in recent weeks has been "Memogate," the controversy surrounding Dan Rathers' 60 Minutes story on President Bush's service record and the falsified records used to support the story. I won't link to the story, it's so thoroughly blogged that it's ridiculous.
So what lessons can we learn from this, children (or "Rather," what lessons should CBS have learned)? Specifically, what action and consequences should CBS have observed and avoided in the future? Allow me to make a few suggestions:
The first observation in general is that there are people who are so devoted to their political cause that they are willing to lie and even commit forgery in order to advance their cause. We have also learned that while they are supposed to be impartial and dedicated to verifying the accuracy of their reporting, the mainstream media is at times willing to overlook niggling little concerns regarding their sources in order to get a story out if that story supports their own opinions or beliefs. In the case of the CBS story, that included both the use of forged documents, as well as a reliance on "unimpeachable sources" that have proven to be highly partisan individuals. That is the Action.
The consequences are that in the age of blogs, if you rely on verifiably untrue sources, the odds are very great that you will be caught, exposed, and discredited.
The Lesson, then, would be? Anyone? Anyone? /Ben Stein
The Lesson is to VERIFY your information before REPORTING it.
So let's take the lesson learned and apply it to another story that's been making the rounds and has garnered a lot of attention: The Draft Controversy. There's been an email circulating warning people that the government, and specifically the Bush administration, plans to reinstate the draft in order to recruit troops for Iraq. It has generated a lot of ill will towards the President, and I even read a very angry letter about it in Sunday's Portland Oregonian.
There's only one problem: The email is lying. As a matter of fact, as the FactCheck article points out, only two draft-related bills have been proposed, both were sponsored by Democrats, both were prior to Iraq, and both were stillborn.
So let's take our lesson learned and apply it to this email. IF you were a journalist -- no, if you were a CBS Journalist, how would you approach this issue?
I think you see where I'm going with this. That's right, CBS failed to learn its lesson. Furthermore, not only did they rely on an already debunked document (this time an email), they also quoted a highly partisan source. they just didn't learn.
I don't know what you'd call this -- Hubris, desperation for a story, blind devotion to a cause, or just plain stupidity. But the one thing you can't call this, by the standard established at the beginning of this post, is intelligence.
UPDATE!
Again, credit goes toAce of Spades HQ. The man's en fuego.
Bill at INDC has interviewed several representatives of CBS regarding this story. Read the whole report here.
One exchange that caught many readers' eyes, as well as my own, was this one:
INDC: "Probably the main concern with the story is that the e-mails that are shown in the piece are false; they've been debunked on various internet sites long ago ..."
Schlesinger: "The fact is, they were going around. I know several people that got them, and it’s gotten people all riled up. Whether or not there’s any reality to there being a draft, is almost besides the point. Do I think there’s going to be a draft? No. But it's an issue that people are talking about."
In other words (and I wasn't the first or only to pick up on this), "The documents are not authentic, but they're accurate)" Furthermore, if people are riled up because of false information, why, as has been asked, is CBS reporting on how upset people are, instead of letting them know how unfounded their reason for being upset is? Why are they reporting that people are afraid because of a lie, and not on the fact that it's a lie?
They Just Don't Learn.
Yum! Crow With Maple Syrup!
If any of you have checked the comments to my post about the email I received Tuesday, you'll see that Venom commented, and I responded pretty harshly. In addition to banning his IP address, I deleted his email.
Well, almost. Then I went ahead and read it. He had some good points, so I've decided to lift the ban, despite the nasty tone of the third email he sent regarding being banned. I'm also making an exception to what I said in the comments, and responding to him in a post, ONE LAST TIME:
*sigh*
You've made some comments that, unfortunately, require a response. It's funny how you make comments making me out to be a troll, yet you do your own trolling in replying. And you're calling me a hypocrite...
It’s not exactly trolling when the intent was to respond in kind.
Several points to your comments and (hopefully) that's it (since I also didn't expect it to get to this level, though your final comment in the bumper sticker post prompted my email to you):
I take exception to being called a hypocrite.
Then don’t come across as one. What prompted that comment was your accusing me of generalizing about you right after you’d generalized about me.
I can observe you being anti-left (which you are)
Yes, I am. But to say “its obvious within a few lines of reading that you share no sympathy for anyone left-of-Reagan.” Goes beyond pointing out my politics and is a generalizalition, you must admit.
and identify myself as not being left-leaning (since I'm not) without contradiction. Because it's true. I call a spade a spade, and if you don't like it, that's your issue. I can be critical of other conservatives if I take exception to the manner in which they voice their opinion.
Ironically enough, that’s exactly the issue I took with your email.
I'd hardly call that being left-leaning. Rather than spend countless energy trying to denigrate the left, I would prefer to do more to show the positives of the right. But, unfortunately, this kind of "take the high road" mentality is becoming more and more
scarce these days, and why politicking has turned into a match over who can sling more mud than the other (with both parties equally guilty).
A valid point. I would point out some reasons why I think those expectations are unrealistic, but that’s an entirely different thread, so I’ll concede the point for now.
2) Not once in the bumper sticker post was it mentioned about the other bull$hit you and your wife have endured leading up to this. You can excuse me (and the rest of us) for not knowing you were near the breaking point. If you had mentioned this beforehand (with as little or as much detail as you think it may have warranted), it might have helped put the situation in context. And, in the end, you lost a bumper sticker and not your voice. And yes, I was poking fun. I actually wasn't intending to troll; I just thought it was a little much (you acknowledge this, as well) to rant about 1 bumper sticker. Again, in context, it amounts to more.
That’s another good point. I forgot that you neither know me personally nor have been reading my blog long, you’d have seen that leftist violence and nastiness is something I have a high level of annoyance towards, and would have recognized this as a last straw. As for not losing my voice, I never said I did. I said that this was an example of someone trying to shout over my voice, by defacing my property.
You're right, you do write about more than just politics. You can apologize for your error (in assuming I was an ally from the idiots who defaced your bumper), and I can apologize for my error.
Accepted. Although they didn’t deface my bumper, since I put the sticker on the window.
"The distaff of this, is, of course: If you don't like what I have to write, DON'T READ IT!" It's kind of hard to not like something if I haven't read it, wouldn't you say?
Rather. I was thinking more of the adage “Once bitten twice shy.” Your persistence prompted that comment.
"Exactly where do I complain about anyone exercising their free speech? Show me. Put up or shut up, Tinkerbell." Hmm...I'd have to say that this comment: "How naive do you think I am, to expect me not to pay attention to the antics of movie producers making hate and lie-filled movies, "comediennes" standing on stage and making snide, obscene comments about the president, or 527's like MoveOn, the Media Fund, and all of Soros' other little whores/handmaidens," sounds like a pretty big complaint by you. If you're not complaining about these people's opinions, what are you doing, then?
Complaining about the hypocrisy of the left in doing those things while accusing Republicans of being the ones fighting a dirty, negative camapaign. Read a bit further up: “I've heard a lot of pissing and moaning lately from the left about how nasty and mean Republicans are. I've heard all the chatter about Bush=Hitler and how our freedoms are being trampled on by the Right and how I'm a digital Brownshirt. I've heard Democrats say that it's time they stopped playing nice and fair and started slinging mud the way they claim Republicans do.”
This post occurred right after the RNC, and that was the entire tone of the rhetoric coming from the Democrats. I may be offended by the things Soros, Hollywood, Moore, and their ilk say, but as long as they don’t commit slander or libel, they’re free to say it. What I was complaining about was the blatant self-ironic hypocrisy of them saying those things and then complaining about anything a Republican says. That’s my beef, their double standard.
And "Tinkerbell?" Is this what you've been reduced to? Name-calling? Seems pretty defeatist of you to resort to that. Taking a shot at manhood? What, you didn't grow up from high school?
It was out of line, and I do apologize. Think you can avoid the personal shots too?
Anyhow, by your own admission, you've said some things over the top and I'm probably guilty of that. The Internet, of course, has the ability to distort emotion. What could often times be an amicable debate in person ends up being more unpleasant than it probably warrants over a computer screen.
It’s not the Internet necessarily. Politics have roused this kind of passion for generations.
And his third email:
LOL! Wow, you're all about free speech. LMAO! Banning me because I happen to question you and point out faults in your argument.
No, I banned you because I thought you were being a rude, smug jackass. I’ve admitted my mistake, don’t make me regret it. As for free speech, as you’ve pointed out, yours is still intact, and was, even when you were banned -- you have other outlets for expression, don't you? You can say anything you want, I don't have to let you into my living room to do it. My blog is my intellectual property, not Hyde Park. I retain the right to police it any way I see fit. See my first post on this policy.
Please. Pick a fight with you? It's called debating. And you can't withstand even a little of it!
Sorry if I didn’t see a comment like your first one (Wow, a bumper sticker. What is this world coming to?) as an invitation to open debate, it sounded pretty dismissive.
You're definitely quite the neophyte in this, aren't you.
You’re making it personal again, aren't you. I'll overlook it, but please, let's both try to be civil.
One last thing. If you want to email me because you want what you say, good or bad, to be kept between us, for whatever reason, fine. I posted one email because I thought you were a jackass, I’ve posted this second because I acknowledge I was one too. But if that’s the reason you email, say so. If you want to make a long public comment, do what I do – create a WP document, then cut it and paste it in sections to several concurrent comments. That’s fine. Again, the character limit is Haloscan’s not mine.
Well, almost. Then I went ahead and read it. He had some good points, so I've decided to lift the ban, despite the nasty tone of the third email he sent regarding being banned. I'm also making an exception to what I said in the comments, and responding to him in a post, ONE LAST TIME:
*sigh*
You've made some comments that, unfortunately, require a response. It's funny how you make comments making me out to be a troll, yet you do your own trolling in replying. And you're calling me a hypocrite...
It’s not exactly trolling when the intent was to respond in kind.
Several points to your comments and (hopefully) that's it (since I also didn't expect it to get to this level, though your final comment in the bumper sticker post prompted my email to you):
I take exception to being called a hypocrite.
Then don’t come across as one. What prompted that comment was your accusing me of generalizing about you right after you’d generalized about me.
I can observe you being anti-left (which you are)
Yes, I am. But to say “its obvious within a few lines of reading that you share no sympathy for anyone left-of-Reagan.” Goes beyond pointing out my politics and is a generalizalition, you must admit.
and identify myself as not being left-leaning (since I'm not) without contradiction. Because it's true. I call a spade a spade, and if you don't like it, that's your issue. I can be critical of other conservatives if I take exception to the manner in which they voice their opinion.
Ironically enough, that’s exactly the issue I took with your email.
I'd hardly call that being left-leaning. Rather than spend countless energy trying to denigrate the left, I would prefer to do more to show the positives of the right. But, unfortunately, this kind of "take the high road" mentality is becoming more and more
scarce these days, and why politicking has turned into a match over who can sling more mud than the other (with both parties equally guilty).
A valid point. I would point out some reasons why I think those expectations are unrealistic, but that’s an entirely different thread, so I’ll concede the point for now.
2) Not once in the bumper sticker post was it mentioned about the other bull$hit you and your wife have endured leading up to this. You can excuse me (and the rest of us) for not knowing you were near the breaking point. If you had mentioned this beforehand (with as little or as much detail as you think it may have warranted), it might have helped put the situation in context. And, in the end, you lost a bumper sticker and not your voice. And yes, I was poking fun. I actually wasn't intending to troll; I just thought it was a little much (you acknowledge this, as well) to rant about 1 bumper sticker. Again, in context, it amounts to more.
That’s another good point. I forgot that you neither know me personally nor have been reading my blog long, you’d have seen that leftist violence and nastiness is something I have a high level of annoyance towards, and would have recognized this as a last straw. As for not losing my voice, I never said I did. I said that this was an example of someone trying to shout over my voice, by defacing my property.
You're right, you do write about more than just politics. You can apologize for your error (in assuming I was an ally from the idiots who defaced your bumper), and I can apologize for my error.
Accepted. Although they didn’t deface my bumper, since I put the sticker on the window.
"The distaff of this, is, of course: If you don't like what I have to write, DON'T READ IT!" It's kind of hard to not like something if I haven't read it, wouldn't you say?
Rather. I was thinking more of the adage “Once bitten twice shy.” Your persistence prompted that comment.
"Exactly where do I complain about anyone exercising their free speech? Show me. Put up or shut up, Tinkerbell." Hmm...I'd have to say that this comment: "How naive do you think I am, to expect me not to pay attention to the antics of movie producers making hate and lie-filled movies, "comediennes" standing on stage and making snide, obscene comments about the president, or 527's like MoveOn, the Media Fund, and all of Soros' other little whores/handmaidens," sounds like a pretty big complaint by you. If you're not complaining about these people's opinions, what are you doing, then?
Complaining about the hypocrisy of the left in doing those things while accusing Republicans of being the ones fighting a dirty, negative camapaign. Read a bit further up: “I've heard a lot of pissing and moaning lately from the left about how nasty and mean Republicans are. I've heard all the chatter about Bush=Hitler and how our freedoms are being trampled on by the Right and how I'm a digital Brownshirt. I've heard Democrats say that it's time they stopped playing nice and fair and started slinging mud the way they claim Republicans do.”
This post occurred right after the RNC, and that was the entire tone of the rhetoric coming from the Democrats. I may be offended by the things Soros, Hollywood, Moore, and their ilk say, but as long as they don’t commit slander or libel, they’re free to say it. What I was complaining about was the blatant self-ironic hypocrisy of them saying those things and then complaining about anything a Republican says. That’s my beef, their double standard.
And "Tinkerbell?" Is this what you've been reduced to? Name-calling? Seems pretty defeatist of you to resort to that. Taking a shot at manhood? What, you didn't grow up from high school?
It was out of line, and I do apologize. Think you can avoid the personal shots too?
Anyhow, by your own admission, you've said some things over the top and I'm probably guilty of that. The Internet, of course, has the ability to distort emotion. What could often times be an amicable debate in person ends up being more unpleasant than it probably warrants over a computer screen.
It’s not the Internet necessarily. Politics have roused this kind of passion for generations.
And his third email:
LOL! Wow, you're all about free speech. LMAO! Banning me because I happen to question you and point out faults in your argument.
No, I banned you because I thought you were being a rude, smug jackass. I’ve admitted my mistake, don’t make me regret it. As for free speech, as you’ve pointed out, yours is still intact, and was, even when you were banned -- you have other outlets for expression, don't you? You can say anything you want, I don't have to let you into my living room to do it. My blog is my intellectual property, not Hyde Park. I retain the right to police it any way I see fit. See my first post on this policy.
Please. Pick a fight with you? It's called debating. And you can't withstand even a little of it!
Sorry if I didn’t see a comment like your first one (Wow, a bumper sticker. What is this world coming to?) as an invitation to open debate, it sounded pretty dismissive.
You're definitely quite the neophyte in this, aren't you.
You’re making it personal again, aren't you. I'll overlook it, but please, let's both try to be civil.
One last thing. If you want to email me because you want what you say, good or bad, to be kept between us, for whatever reason, fine. I posted one email because I thought you were a jackass, I’ve posted this second because I acknowledge I was one too. But if that’s the reason you email, say so. If you want to make a long public comment, do what I do – create a WP document, then cut it and paste it in sections to several concurrent comments. That’s fine. Again, the character limit is Haloscan’s not mine.
Live Debate Feed
You'll notice a new box on the right side of my blog. This is temporary. It contains a live feed which will be updated during the debates, and will be used by the Bush campaign to fact check any claims made by Kerry. According to the Bush campaign, "each time John Kerry says something false or inaccurate during the debates, the live feed will be updated instantly with the facts."
You can get more information regarding this feature, including the HTML code to add it to your own blog, at the Bush Website.
You can get more information regarding this feature, including the HTML code to add it to your own blog, at the Bush Website.
Dutch Treat
I'm still jazzzed from my Malkinlaunch, and to a certain extent from the response to my post on the hate mail. So I thought I'd share the love.
One of the lines in the letter that I just kind of took in stride the first time has proven prophetically ironic. That's where the writer says, "its obvious within a few lines of reading that you share no sympathy for anyone left-of-Reagan."
Let's set aside for now the reply already made, as well as the fact that I'm probably slightly to the left of Reagan on a few issues, as well as to the right of him on a few others. Let's go back and ponder the fact that this writer considered it an insult to compare me politically to Reagan. This comment appears to me to be similar to the hyperbole I or other conservatives use on occasion to make a point, when we say that, for instance, John Kerry *is* a moderate -- when compared to Pol Pot. The connotation seems to be that Reagan is about as evilly far out to the Right as Mao or Lenin is to the Left.
This is laughable. When you consider the great good accomplished by the man, his victory over the Soviet regime, the only thing a man like RWR has in common with a Mao or a Lenin is his impact on history. He is, in my opinion, one of the greatest American Presidents ever, certainly one of the two greatest of the 20th Century.
And now I've been afforded an opportunity to honor him. I was sent an email regarding this movie:
"In the Face of Evil," to Open Conservative Liberty Film Festival
in Los Angeles October 1st
Hollywood, CA - September 22nd 2004- Writer/Director Stephen K. Bannon's "In the Face of Evil: Reagan's War in Word and Deed" will open the 2004 Liberty Film Festival, Hollywood's first openly conservative film festival. The festival will be held Oct. 1st-3rd at the Pacific Design Center in West Hollywood.
"In the Face of Evil: Reagan's War in Word and Deed" is a controversial look at Reagan's victory over Communism within the context of mankind's continual fight against evil, including the current war against Islamic Fascism. Based on Executive Producer Peter Schweizer's book "Reagan's War," "In the Face of Evil: Reagan's War in Word and Dead" was produced by Tim Watkins, and co-written by Julia Jones.
Screening time: 6:40 pm
Screening Location:
SilverScreen Theatre at Pacific Design Center
8687 Melrose Avenue
2nd floor Center Green
West Hollywood , CA 90069
site: www.libertyfilmfestival.com
"The must-see movie of the season...disturbing and deeply-moving...I found myself weeping" - Maggie Gallagher, NEW YORK POST
"A brilliant effort...extremely well done."- Rush Limbaugh
“ A powerful portrayal of a critical point in history that exposes the intensity of
the struggle against communism and President Reagan’s campaign for victory.
As someone who had lived these times, I was very moved by the detail and
emotion in which they were brought out on film. The lessons of our struggle
against the evil empire are more relevant than ever in regards to the conflict
of today’s world.”
- Lech Walesa, Nobel Laurite and former President of Poland
One of the lines in the letter that I just kind of took in stride the first time has proven prophetically ironic. That's where the writer says, "its obvious within a few lines of reading that you share no sympathy for anyone left-of-Reagan."
Let's set aside for now the reply already made, as well as the fact that I'm probably slightly to the left of Reagan on a few issues, as well as to the right of him on a few others. Let's go back and ponder the fact that this writer considered it an insult to compare me politically to Reagan. This comment appears to me to be similar to the hyperbole I or other conservatives use on occasion to make a point, when we say that, for instance, John Kerry *is* a moderate -- when compared to Pol Pot. The connotation seems to be that Reagan is about as evilly far out to the Right as Mao or Lenin is to the Left.
This is laughable. When you consider the great good accomplished by the man, his victory over the Soviet regime, the only thing a man like RWR has in common with a Mao or a Lenin is his impact on history. He is, in my opinion, one of the greatest American Presidents ever, certainly one of the two greatest of the 20th Century.
And now I've been afforded an opportunity to honor him. I was sent an email regarding this movie:
"In the Face of Evil," to Open Conservative Liberty Film Festival
in Los Angeles October 1st
Hollywood, CA - September 22nd 2004- Writer/Director Stephen K. Bannon's "In the Face of Evil: Reagan's War in Word and Deed" will open the 2004 Liberty Film Festival, Hollywood's first openly conservative film festival. The festival will be held Oct. 1st-3rd at the Pacific Design Center in West Hollywood.
"In the Face of Evil: Reagan's War in Word and Deed" is a controversial look at Reagan's victory over Communism within the context of mankind's continual fight against evil, including the current war against Islamic Fascism. Based on Executive Producer Peter Schweizer's book "Reagan's War," "In the Face of Evil: Reagan's War in Word and Dead" was produced by Tim Watkins, and co-written by Julia Jones.
Screening time: 6:40 pm
Screening Location:
SilverScreen Theatre at Pacific Design Center
8687 Melrose Avenue
2nd floor Center Green
West Hollywood , CA 90069
site: www.libertyfilmfestival.com
"The must-see movie of the season...disturbing and deeply-moving...I found myself weeping" - Maggie Gallagher, NEW YORK POST
"A brilliant effort...extremely well done."- Rush Limbaugh
“ A powerful portrayal of a critical point in history that exposes the intensity of
the struggle against communism and President Reagan’s campaign for victory.
As someone who had lived these times, I was very moved by the detail and
emotion in which they were brought out on film. The lessons of our struggle
against the evil empire are more relevant than ever in regards to the conflict
of today’s world.”
- Lech Walesa, Nobel Laurite and former President of Poland
Wednesday, September 29, 2004
Maybe We Are... (Movin' On Up)
Remember this post about Blog Mobility? In it, I qouted Michelle Malkin. In fact, the whole post was inspired by her entry.
Well, guess what?
SHE RETURNED THE FAVOR!!!!!!
WOO HOO!!!!!!
Let's see. In about 24 hours, I've received my first hate email, AND been quoted by a major pundit both in the blogosphere and the MSM.
If this generates a significant abount of traffic for my blog, given the subject of the post, I can't help but notice the synchronicity.
Well, guess what?
SHE RETURNED THE FAVOR!!!!!!
WOO HOO!!!!!!
Let's see. In about 24 hours, I've received my first hate email, AND been quoted by a major pundit both in the blogosphere and the MSM.
If this generates a significant abount of traffic for my blog, given the subject of the post, I can't help but notice the synchronicity.
P.I.T.S.
That's Pregnancy Induced Tourette's Syndrome, or just "Pregnancy Tourette's," a term my wife coined to describe the sudden outbursts of sailor-intimidating profanity she is prone to these days, inspired by the nausea, indigestion, and general discomfort that are her constant friends.
She's at 18 weeks, well into her second trimester. We've been told these are the halcyon days of pregnancy, when morning sickness abates and before the awkwardness of late term zeppelinitis.
My response to those who seek to encourage us with this hope? Well, I think my wife's P.I.T.S. speaks for both of us.
She's at 18 weeks, well into her second trimester. We've been told these are the halcyon days of pregnancy, when morning sickness abates and before the awkwardness of late term zeppelinitis.
My response to those who seek to encourage us with this hope? Well, I think my wife's P.I.T.S. speaks for both of us.
We Get Lots and Lots and Lots and Lots of Letter!
This summary is not available. Please
click here to view the post.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)