Darleen's Place

« August 2005 | Main | October 2005 »

September 30, 2005

'He should have known better' - the Bennett kerfluffle

News story here.

Extensive analysis, with sources and quotes, by Jeff Goldstein.

'nuf said.

Posted by Darleen at 12:52 PM | Comments (9)

To: the World Re: the Internet

We have taken into consideration your continued demand that you should be in charge of a system you neither invented nor invested in. We have reviewed your claim that the Internet is a “global resource” as an authoritative imperative to be allowed full rights to claim authority over the Internet’s master directories. We make our decision in the fullness of the history of the Internet to date and of the precedence of your handling of other international organizations and responsibilities. Therefore, we have come to the following conclusion.

FUCK OFF.

Sincerely

USA

Posted by Darleen at 12:23 PM | Comments (0)

The moral connection between racists and the radical Left

Racism, it has been posited, is the most primitive of collectivism. What can be more anti-individual than the ideology that melanin level is an indication of immutable characteristics – i.e. laziness, sloth, dishonesty, or stupidity? From the idea of wiping out “the inferior” to the idea of “the white man’s burden”, bigotry hard or soft is still bigotry borne of the collectivist ideology of racism.

The radical Left plays its own cover of the racists’ song by making melanin level an indication of immutable political characteristics. The radical Left stakes out an “authentic political tenet” then declares that all individuals of a particular melanin (or gender or sexual orientation) MUST fully, completely and without question, adhere to such tenet or be declared an apostate (“inauthentic”). In addition, just as racists use the “inherent badness” of its target group as the explanation of all faults and problems of a society, so do Leftists who target class groups – “corporations”, “businesses”, and “the rich”. Racists lament “if only we could get rid of black/brown/jew how much better it would be for us!” Leftists lament “if only we could get rid of rich/white males/jew/corporations how much better it would be for us!” Both collectivist ideologies purposely refuse to deal with the fact that single characteristics, either melanin or bank account levels, are no indication of an individual’s moral worth.

There are good and bad individuals in every demographic. Morality is about choice, not skin color. It is about having good values and also acting on those good values. It is not about whether you have an Oscar on the mantelpiece or have to work two jobs to feed your children, it is about how you live your life – choosing to live as a human being, not as an animal.

Morality is not easy. It takes a fair amount of reflection and good, old [un]common sense to both formulate a system of values proper to human beings and have the internal fortitude to try and follow them. Moral people, unlike racists and Leftists, do not demand perfection from others. Moral people realize that no one is perfect and look at morality like a bank account, where deposits and withdrawals happen. Moral people just would like others to have their accounts in the black.

Posted by Darleen at 12:20 PM | Comments (11) | TrackBack

September 29, 2005

Thoughts on the roles of adults and children

Charmaine at Reasoned Audacity caught a lot of grief for her post commenting on “the raunch culture.” In the comments, the always reasonable Attila Girl makes this valid point:

I *do* think there is utility in making some sites "adult." I watch the Sopranos. I read Jeff Goldstein's blog. I don't think the word "adult" should simply be a synonym for "pornographic." And I'm against making the entire web "child-safe."

Certainly, I, like most of the conservatives and liberals I know, do not want to ban adult activities. The idea of everything geared towards kids is abhorrent because it makes children the drivers of the culture rather then students of it and eventual contributors to it.

Reviewing the other comments on Charmaine’s thread, I believe the friction between the “literalist” liberals who do not/will not acknowledge a “raunch” culture and “alarmist” conservatives who demand legislative solutions, is actually a result of the blurring between adult/child realms. And some of the blame can be laid directly on the doorstep of my Baby-Boomer generation.

During the late 60’s and into the 70’s one of the most damning things that one could be labeled with was being accused of being a hypocrite. No matter your argument, your behavior, your good works, the charge “hypocrite” would be like being slapped across the face with a mackerel – it hurt and it left a lingering stink. It didn’t matter that you couldn’t figure out just exactly which things made you a “hypocrite,” perception was all that mattered. In the rush to reject our parents’ generation grew the idea that people “couldn’t be real” as hypocrisy. If one did one thing due to duty or promise while wishing to do another – hypocrite! The Baby Boomers were all about “doing my own thing” and “being true to myself” and “if you can’t be with the one you love…” Why wear a tie or dress in Sunday clothes for church? Hypocrite! Why stay monogamous when you really wanted to just “love your neighbor?” Hypocrite! Behave differently due to circumstance? HYPOCRITE!

To illustrate – my grandmother, born 1904, dressed for church and shopping downtown. Hat, gloves, stockings, pumps – that was the way a lady behaved in general public. At the same time, my grandparents loved to nightclub. They dressed to the nines and engaged in dancing, drinking and listening to music in clubs that would be totally unsuitable for children. Not to mention that during the early 20’s before my grandparents married my grandmother was a flapper; with bobbed platinum-blonde hair, short dress and long beads. For people of my generation, such a thing would be deemed HYPOCRITICAL.

Of course it wasn’t. Anymore than a person today that believes that there is a difference between children and adults and adults are charged with the responsibility to behave differently around children then when they are among themselves.

The major problem with contemporary pop-raunch culture is that the idea of excluding children from adult activities can easily get one slapped with the mackerel.

I’m always wondering what the hell a parent is thinking when I see them taking their pre-pubescent kidlets to an “R” rated movie. Is four-year-old Tina really going to understand that the spurting blood is “just pretend?” What lesson is six-year-old Jason learning when watching a graphic rape scene?

It’s not just the movies. It is adults, PARENTS, who dress their little girls like Paris Hilton hookers or buy them Bratz. It is adults who make their youngsters mini-adults when they provide alcohol or bedrooms at their kids’ parties.

Whether such impulses come from guilt or a desire to be “cool” with their kids’ friends, we do our children no favors by not allowing them to BE children and preserving their innocence. And we do OURSELVES no favors by not allowing ourselves to play different roles out of mackerel-phobia.

Years ago Las Vegas was almost exclusively an adult resort. I can remember my grandparents staying the weekend to baby-sit my sister and me while my parents and their friends would set off across the desert for an adults only get away. Arriving in a town that catered to adults – the complimentary drink sent up to one’s room upon check in, gambling all night, late night shows featuring comedians who did a much different and more adult routine then they did for tv audiences, shows with tall women wearing not much more than beads and feathers, breakfasts and lounging around a pool with nary a youngster in sight.

Behaving differently due to circumstance is NOT hypocrisy. And wanting to clearly define adult and child roles is NOT hypocrisy.

Hypocrisy is not the worst charge anyone can level because much of the time, it indicates the willingness on the part of the accused to try and establish standards. The person that can never be accused of hypocrisy is the one that has no standards or values.

In the public realm where children and adults mix, we should remain mindful of not exposing them to age-inappropriate material. As adults, our own realms can be a libertarian, or even libertine, as we like, as long as we keep it amongst us adults.

Posted by Darleen at 12:36 PM | Comments (3)

Pink is now a 'discriminatory' color

God save me from people who obviously have no life

IOWA CITY, Iowa - The pink visitors' locker room at the University of Iowa's stadium is making some people see red.

Several professors and students joined the call Tuesday for the athletic department to do away with the pink showers, carpeting and lockers, a decades-long Hawkeye football tradition.

Critics say the use of pink demeans women, perpetuates offensive stereotypes about women and homosexuality, and puts the university in the uncomfortable position of tacitly supporting those messages.

So, only women can wear pink (an almost 'neutral' this past year) without being "offensive"? And someone ought to be complaining about these guys, too.

Once we ban pink from the palette, should we start in on blue? I mean, how dare we use a color so associated with the Oppressive Patriarchy?

Posted by Darleen at 06:46 AM | Comments (1)

Cindy's sexapade didn't last long

Geez, I guess whatever giggles Mommy Sheehan got when the gloved hand slipped didn't last long. Mommy got to meet with John McCain and promptly called him warmonger. I'm no fan of McCain and have substantial policy issues with Capt. Queeg's helping pen an anti-free-speech bill disguised as "campaign reform" but I'm sure he wasn't expecting that kind of verbal profanity from Mommy.

Then again, why would McCain meet with her in the first place? It was all about him, of course, but he couldn't have expected this.

Posted by Darleen at 06:32 AM | Comments (1)

I blame Bush

Los Angeles Times on the fires that have broken out in several basin locations:

LOS ANGELES -- A wind-whipped brush fire quickly tripled in size early Thursday to more than 9,300 acres, destroying at least one home and prompting evacuations as a ridge of flames was visible for miles.

The blaze burned to the edge of a number of multimillion-dollar homes that abut rural, picturesque hillsides in the San Fernando Valley. Homes in several communities in Los Angeles and Ventura counties were evacuated, but officials did not release an exact number.

Where's the 82nd Airborne? Where's the military to take over the local pd/fd and shove aside the local mayors? Why hasn't Bush deposed Gov. Schwarzenegger? Who the FUCK cares about the Consitution when there is an emergency? I have no, none, NADA personal responsibility ... it's the job of the federal government to do EVERYTHING for me!

/clue-challenged Left

Posted by Darleen at 06:23 AM | Comments (0)

September 28, 2005

A look at SCOTUS from downunder

An Aussie wonders about all the fuss about Roberts

If ever one is tempted to question the progressive orthodoxy that says every sophisticated country needs a bill of rights, it is right about now. When you contrast the bedlam unfolding over empty seats on the US highest court with the smooth, untroubled, barely noticed appointment last week of Susan Crennan to our own High Court, the lesson is clear. Why politicise our courts?
...
With no disrespect, Crennan's appointment has already passed from newsprint to fish wrapping. And that is a very good thing. Why? Because in Australia, to the chagrin of many legal activists, most of our judges do not prance around as politicians in legal drag as they do in the US.

But it cannot remain that way if you hand sweeping power to judges in the form of a bill of rights. Give judges a mandate to make what they will of the vague and general platitudes found in your standard bill of rights and they will end up making sweeping political decisions.
....
That's why the Senate Judiciary Committee questioned Roberts for nearly 20 hours on all the hot-button issues. Last Friday he cleared that hurdle, only to face a full Senate vote this week where Democrat Senator Hillary Clinton has vowed to vote against Roberts for failing to present his views "with enough clarity and specificity".

In other words, Clinton wants a judge who will clearly and specifically endorse her Leftist agenda. The fear is that Roberts may help roll back some of the more blatant attempts at judicial law-making on the basis that those decisions might reflect the personal agendas of certain judges, but they sure don't reflect the wording of the US Constitution.

h/t Angry Clam at Patterico

Posted by Darleen at 09:53 PM | Comments (1)

Why I rarely watch the Big Three

I tried, I really tried to watch the "new" ABC show, Commander in Chief. But at 23 minutes into the show, I just couldn't take it anymore.

The dialogue was inane, the initial storyline unbelievable, the acting abysmal, the director phoned it in ...

This is the big jewel that ABC has been aggressively marketing? One would be forgiven for flirting with the idea that this was made by people trying to ridicule the idea of a woman president. Geena Davis attempts to communicate seriousness by not moving a muscle in her face -- or did she over do the botox like the collagened lips?

Charmaine went above and beyond and live-blogged it, coming up with this summation:

Is it possible to jump the shark in the very first episode?

And Jeff Harrell points out why some of us are going to be particularly disturbed by CinC:

Mary McDonnell has been playing the president on a different and far superior television show for going on three years now, and the issue of her gender has never once come up.

Bets now, how many episodes will this aired before being yanked?

Posted by Darleen at 06:39 AM | Comments (2)

September 27, 2005

Reality check

I have an ex-husband. My divorce was very emotionally painful for me because I watched a man I loved, married and bore children with change. After 15 years of marriage, during a time when he increasingly ignored me and the kids, refused to spend time with us, refused to participate in family life, I saw what his behavior was doing to the family and I gave him an ultimatum. He had to choose between continuing his behavior or his family. His ignoring of his family and marriage vows was an abuse of the promises and relationship he had committed to long ago.

He chose to continue his behavior and I asked him to move out.

In the comments under the last post on Mommy Sheehan, Brad was outraged that I characterized Cindy's treatment of her husband as "abuse." He said I was not "privy" to private family information. Yet, it is public record that her family has not been happy with her behavior, her husband wanted her home. And when Cindy continued with her behavior, he has filed for divorce.

How is what happened with her any different then what happened with me? I gave my husband the choice between the bottle or his family. Mr. Sheehan gave Cindy the choice between him and fame.

My sympathies are with him. I know how hard that decision must have been.

Posted by Darleen at 01:05 PM | Comments (5)

September 26, 2005

Caption this

See Cindy smile and hug? This is the closest she's gotten to having sex in really long time.
---------

Share your captions in the comments!

Posted by Darleen at 10:56 PM | Comments (46)

The refusal of the anti-war Left to make a moral judgment

about the "insurgents" ... their willingness to equivocate or say "but what about ....?" and make erroneous comparisons as demonstrated by the weird, creepy and many times psychotic DC march makes one wonder how much moral encouragement it gives to Associated Press to keep calling these evil people, merely "gunmen"

Gunmen Kill Five Shiite Teachers in Iraq

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Insurgents dragged five Shiite Muslim schoolteachers and their driver into a classroom, lined them against a wall and gunned them down Monday ...

The shooting was a rare attack on a school amid Iraq's relentless violence, and it was particularly stunning since the gunmen targeted teachers in a school where the children were mainly Sunnis. Elsewhere Monday, a suicide attack and roadside bombings killed 10 Iraqis and three Americans, bringing to at least 52 the number of people killed in the past two days.

The Iraqi and U.S. governments have warned that Sunni Arab insurgents are likely to increase their attacks ahead of the Oct. 15 national referendum ...

Earlier this month, al-Qaida's leader in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, declared "all-out war" on Shiites and vowed to kill anyone participating in the referendum.

al-Zarqawi is the person George Galloway supports, the leader of the terrorists that the DC marchers support. Kind of belies their wimperings that they are all about democracy and voting rights, eh?

And they carry banners calling for Cheney's castration.

Bizzaro world indeed.

Posted by Darleen at 06:03 PM | Comments (1)

anti-war anti-American rally roundup

I spent the better part of yesterday at the park with my grandsons. Sean and Nikolas turn three tomorrow (wow). The sun was warm, the sky a brilliant blue and the boys ran off that seemingly inexhaustible energy that imbue little kids. They rolled down slopes of grass, tried all the playground equipment and ran from sports field to sports field to watch the soccer and softball games that were going on. We walked home later to snacks of peanutbutter and sliced apples -- and naps! Glorious, wonderful naps!

It was a nice, relaxing day far from the Leftard Jihadists displaying their varied neuroses and psychoses from DC to LA.

And judging from some commenters, like Neil in my DC thread, to others I've read elsewheres, there has been some nervousness about the "message" that is really coming through to even the most casual observer of the Circus of Hate in DC. Neil at least has the honesty to finally call ANSWER for what it is, while others only equivocate or try the canard that ANSWER has nothing to do with the marches. Interestingly, the latter are annoyed, to one degree or another, that people with cameras have showed up at the rallies and are publishing the images online. Imagine that! From Michelle Malkin here's the humor (click for larger image):

Juliette covers BDS creepiness in El-Lay:

And Smash covers the catfight in San Diego. Wish I had gone there again like I did back in March. From Smash:

Godwin's Law has been lost on this Bu$Hitler types long ago.

I couldn't pick a favorite from Mike Freeland's DC collection. It has to be seen to be believed.

Posted by Darleen at 09:48 AM | Comments (0)

September 25, 2005

Despite my bias, I'm obligated to speak

I actually read the story of the 14 y/o girl expelled from a private Christian school because her parents are lesbians a couple of days ago. I hesitated to write about it, but after reading Jody's excellent piece on the subject, Giving Christians a bad name, I realized I needed to add my voice rather than recuse myself from the subject. First I need tell you of my bias.

About 1987 I looked to enroll my daughters at Ontario Christian and it was I who rejected the place.

I lived in Ontario, CA, between 1983 and 1999. I was married, a full-time homemaker with very young children (daughters born '79, '81, '83, '87). Jennifer (eldest) was already reading at age four but because she was a winter baby she would not have been able to start public school until she was close to six years old. That was when I found a loving, family-oriented private school only a few blocks from my home, Bethel Christian. Jenn started there the fall before she turned five and thrived. However, the school closed at the end of her third grade term (Erin was in kindergarten, Heather in preschool) and I had to start looking at other schools in the area and Ontario Christian School had a local reputation for excellent academics.

They have two campuses, k-8 on Euclid Ave., the high school is on Philadelphia. I called, then stopped by the Euclid campus, chatted with the office people and took home a huge packet of paperwork which I immediately started reading.

And something just didn't sit right with me.

Certainly, my girls ... er, my family ... met the initial criteria. We were members of a local Catholic church and attended regularly, I knew my girls would meet their academic standards, but I was bothered by the whole issue dealing with family "immorality." The section had an almost scolding quality. Add to that the fact that the FAMILY was to be interviewed and "passed" by the Board of Trustees before admission was granted. Was this a prep school or a Christian school?

This wasn't the loving embrace of the girls' old school. This wasn't Welcome the stranger, the Christian call to offer hospitality. This wasn't the humbleness of accepting people as they are and being witness through one's own good works.

Ontario Christian School was operating from exclusivity and a parsimonious spirit.

I tossed the application in the trash.

I'm not aggitated by the Leftists and anti-religious bigots who have gleefully been using this incident to finger-point. Even if this were the most welcoming of Christian schools and the story had been how this girl and her family were embraced and supported, they would not be caught dead praising the school. And in the ensuing years I am no longer an active member of a church. But I feel I must still speak out against OCS, even though they have every right, legally, to be as "exclusive" as any prep school that interviews "the family" before admission. Certainly, a snooty prep school expelling a student because, say, it was revealed mommy and daddy had not the ivy league education as required would not have generated the kind of outrage - some legitimate, some faux - this story has. Dennis Prager (in another context, but valid here)

When a secular person commits evil, it is surely evil, but it doesn't bring God and religion in disrepute. When a person commits evil in God's name, however, he destroys the greatest hope for goodness to prevail on earth -- widespread belief in a God who demands goodness (ethical monotheism). There is nothing as evil as religious evil.

I'm not calling what OCS has done "evil", but they have, by their own uncharitable actions, brought disrepute to other Christian schools who do lovingly fulfill their mission to their students.

Posted by Darleen at 06:55 AM | Comments (4)

September 24, 2005

The DC anti-war anti-American rally

Click for larger image

Lovely sentiment and so, er, intellectually based.

In the background is the Stalinist/Anti-Semitic group ANSWER's banner. Need we say more?

Every single adult at this rally cannot claim innocence of ANSWER's raison d'etre. It is there, bold as brass, on the banner. ANSWER is morally equivalent to the KKK or Neo-Nazis and that makes Mommy Sheehan, Jesse Jackson and the rest of the Leftist jihadists on the speaking tour no better than the ugliest, robe-wearing Kluxer decrying the government allowing "mud people" rights.

I dare any one to apologize for these contemptible excuses for human beings.

Picture by Michelle Malkin. More at the link.

UPDATE: Some more fun pics at Davids Medienkritik

Posted by Darleen at 04:17 PM | Comments (15)

Battlestar Galactica - Pegasus

In rereading my comments on the first season's ending I would say much the same but add that the writers have not strayed from presenting us with the deep, dark, twisted emotions, motivations, desires and sins of humans in crisis. We all like to believe that most people will act heroic in the clinches, but even a cursory look at the thousands of years of human history shows that those who even minimally struggle with morality in an attempt to do good are just not in the majority.

Jeff Harrell quips:

When Baltar is the character who’s on the strongest moral ground, you know you’re seriously being fucked with.

No shit, Sherlock, but you know this is the serious type of fucking where you just lay back and enjoy it.

Honestly, the writing for Pegasus was superb in sounding discordant notes even in the midst of happiness at the BS Pegasus' arrival. Cmdr Adama heard his own words echoed back when Cain expressed dismissive doubt about President Roslin, "The Secretary of Education?". That small throw-away line holds up in relief the long journey both Roslin and Adama have taken over the past two seasons.

Adama's own mistakes also come back to haunt him as (even though he wished it) Cain makes a cursory look at his logs, rejects the context and proceeds to take over even as she had promised him she wouldn't interfere in his ship.

The pressure is relentless and from the condition of the Pegasus' Six-cylon prisoner (wonderfully telegraphed to the audience by Baltar's covering his nose as he first gasps when entering the brig) to Cain's sending her "Cylon interrogator" to rape Sharon, we wonder what really goes on on Pegasus and do we really want to know?

One of the commenters on Jeff's post (yes, he opened his comments for this one) makes the great comparison that Helena Cain is really Kurtz from Heart of Darkness. Certainly Cain doesn't feel any moral constraint in doing things her way, even if it means a few human bodies along the way. Adama and Roslin, for all their own flaws, by their own struggle to "do right" many times struggled against each other. However, their conflict was a conflict of morality and as they fought, they were able achieve some perspective of the other.

BSG allows for this subtle morality play where each flawed individual struggles with the question "should I do this? why am I doing this?" And with two powerful entities, as embodied by Adama and Roslin, the civilian government and the military, their conflicts help keep both sides honest. Cain has "gone up river" and her actions show (including her deliberate action not to talk with President Roslin or supply the civilian fleet) she believes herself beyond conventional morality.

I know I approached BSG long ago with the fear that they just couldn't maintain this level of writing. I worried that the suits would demand something more schlocky, more "marketable", more pablum to attract the 15-22 y/o male demographic. I worried that somewhere along the line, BSG would "sell out"

I take heart in this blurb from Ron Moore as he relates a moral dilemma he faced some years back between giving in and 'playing ball' with the suits or being true to his vision and seeing a pilot he wanted die. Seems in the midst of this he found himself participating on a panel at the Museum of Television and Radio along with Harlan Ellison

At the end, the final question was put to all of us was “Do you have any advice for young writers starting out?” It’s a familiar question, and to be honest, I have a stock response, (which I will someday bore readers of this blog with when I really need material) and I gave it in my usual inimitable fashion, congratulating myself on having held my own throughout the night.

But when the question came around to Harlan, he leaned forward into the microphone, and with all the passion and ferocity I remembered so well from that convention stage in Stony Brook he said:

“Don’t be a whore!”

The world quite literally spun around me under the hot lights and it felt as though the Universe was conveying a message directly to me. It was so simple. “Don’t be a whore!” Don’t write crap because they pay you well. Don’t put your name on something that you know will suck. Don’t sacrifice whatever integrity you have as a writer for a check.

The next day, during the infamous conference call, there came the point my agent had warned me would come, when I either played ball and went with the script I knew in my heart was terrible or my beloved pilot was going to die, and when that moment came, Harlan’s words rang in my ears like the church bells above Quasimodo’s head.

“Don’t be a whore!”

I wasn’t. The project died. And I have been grateful to Harlan Ellison ever since.

As long as Ron Moore is captaining the ship, I've booked full passage.

Posted by Darleen at 12:01 AM | Comments (2)

September 23, 2005

That 70's Feminism! -- Irony challenged, too.

As I said earlier, here, the gender-feminism that arose in the 70's (as opposed to equity-feminism -- I proudly count myself as an equity feminist) is decidedly against choice. I didn't even touch upon the small elements of misandry that popup from time to time in the G-feminism rantings against their wayward, freethinking sisters.

So my morning belly laugh comes from Amanda with this pair of statements (excerpts):

The operative word here is "wife" ... the stay-at-home wife is a must-have accessory to that life ... the real truth, which is that a lot of men still put their egos into having dependent wives

Mandy makes the claim that a "dependent" wife is nothing more than an accessory -- kinda like a house keeping robot from Mercedes.

I need a man if I want some cock. I need a man if I am to have a boyfriend. I need a man to lift some furniture. [I need a man in that I need my male friends, family, coworkers, internet buds and every other man in my life I lean on or just enjoy.] What I don't need a man for is to define me or make me worthy of existence.

While she throws the line I bracketed in the statement in order to attempt to soften the rest, it's clear she is engaging in the same behavior she decries of men -- looking at their partner, not as a person but as an accessory. Mandy wants some cock, men want some pussy so why muck it up with stuff like extended families, PTA meetings, hospital visits, landscaping the yard, the million-and-one everyday tasks of marriage/family and the hardwork of actually having a meaningful relationship? And why, for heaven's sake, would anyone ever make a choice to put their kids before their career in the shortrun run?

Blame that the government doesn't provide free, "quality" daycare from the moment the infant comes home from the hospital.

Blame the Great Patriarchal Conspiracy.

But for goddess' sake, don't let men and women make their own choices about a relationship beyond cock meets pussy!

The deja vu is incredible.

Posted by Darleen at 06:45 AM | Comments (9)

Adventures in Parenting -- What would you have done?

A story about a park encounter from Mieke at Kidsquared. Mieke did good, but she's horribly worried she should have done something more.

Posted by Darleen at 12:00 AM | Comments (0)

September 22, 2005

California news - Meathead and the CTA

From Boi From Troy has the lowdown on the bottom-dwelling attacks comparing Gov. Arnold to George Wallace (wtf?) due to his indication that he would veto the same-sex marriage bill that recently came out of the CA politburo.

Do you know that California public school teachers already pay $78.00 per month in union dues? That's second, statewide, only to the teamsters. And the CTA has been pouring millions -- yes millions of dollars into misleading, eggregious anti-Arnold ads for months. Not all teachers are anti-Arnold and when they woke up to find that the CTA has slapped them all with a "special" assessment on their dues to fund the $45 million attack Arnold ads, they didn't get mad -- they filed a lawsuit.

Posted by Darleen at 01:12 PM | Comments (0)

Mommy Sheehan, ANSWER and the question of 'sincere innocents'

Captain Ed brings to light the far Left and anti-American sources of funding for Mommy Sheehan's traveling clown car.

The groups gathering in Washington this weekend to protest President Bush and the war in Iraq have ties to radical left-wing groups and communist organizations and have enjoyed the support of the left's biggest financial supporter, George Soros. ...
The leaders of ANSWER, founded three days after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, are connected to the Workers World Party, a Marxist group that has expressed support for such dictators as North Korea's Kim Jong-il, Yugoslavia's Slobodan Milosevic and Iraq's Saddam Hussein. The latter two have been ousted from power and jailed.

Other groups associated with ANSWER are the Free Palestine Alliance, U.S.-Mexico Solidarity Foundation and the Muslim Student Association of the U.S. and Canada.

UPJ, founded by liberals who say they were concerned about the radical tactics and smorgasbord of issues trumpeted by ANSWER, says it organized the "S24," or Saturday (Sept. 24) protest first, but Mr. Dobbs said there's "a big overlap" between the protests and "the major point is that we're in D.C. to stop the war in Iraq."

I reject the reasoning I've seen that, regardless of the involvement such as the Stalinist, anti-Semitic ANSWER, many people are "sincere" in protesting the war, innocent of the possible motivations of ANSWER, UPJ, et al.

There are no innocents in this regard. Mommy Sheehan lost her "innocence" when she appeared in public lauding convicted traitor Lynn Stewart and engaging in Judanhass with her "my son joined the military to protect America not die for Israel." Her ever desperate and shrill flights from rationality and morality are no more embarrassing as plainly disgusting. And those that fete her, support her and apologize for her are not "innocent" either.

I hold such protestations of "sincerity" and "innocence" with the same contempt I would hold someone excusing their marching in a KKK/Neo-Nazi/Indentity Church organized "civil rights" march against affirmative action.

These people are indecent. Simply, utterly, contemptuously indecent.

Posted by Darleen at 12:52 PM | Comments (3)

Phil Donohue lusts for Mommy Sheehan

I'm not a regular tv watcher, except for some of the cable channels like HGTV, Sci-fi and the History Channel. But last night as I was flipping around for the latest coverage on hurricane Rita and the book-perfect emergency landing of the jet at LAX I came across Phil Donohue on the Bill O'Reilly Show on FoxNews.

I'm old enough to remember the soft, cuddly, marshmellow Phil when he made the mold for Oprah. Even if old Phil was the Queen of sobsister liberalism, he could be very entertaining in his general cluelessness. Last night I sat with my jaw open watching an obviously deranged man rant on and on about some fascist rightwing conspiracy to unjustly discredit "the courageous, tough" Mommy Sheehan. O'Reilly is definitely not my cup-o-tea, but when Phil started attacking him, too, and saying stuff like "Republicans love to keep sending our children to die in illegal and unconstitutional war in Iraq" I found myself saying to the screen, "Bill! Punch the bastard!" Phil wasn't there to "dialogue" but to spend the segment as a rambling, insulting, lying monologue to demonstrate his full Left cultist creds and to show his new lust interest he cares.

I'll be checking periodically for a transcript. Bill O'Reilly later stated he'd run the "interview" on his radio show today.

What I'd like to ask -- does Marlo know?

Posted by Darleen at 06:51 AM | Comments (1)

September 21, 2005

Late to the party ...

A glitch at The Cotillion has been fixed by Goddess Jody. She does Artemis proud.

Posted by Darleen at 10:26 PM | Comments (0)

Just a note

No, not everyone wants loves liberty or wants freedom*

It's kind of like saying crime would disappear if only one "cured" poverty.

Posted by Darleen at 01:16 PM | Comments (0)

I blame Bush

from SF Chronicle

Sere and silent Mars is no dead planet, but in many ways its surface is dynamic and ever-changing, with gullies actively forming, rocks tumbling and asteroids blasting fresh craters in the sand, new images released Tuesday show.

Even the planet's climate appears to be changing -- perhaps indicating that Mars, like Earth, is undergoing a period of global warming, said scientists interpreting the images.

Posted by Darleen at 06:30 AM | Comments (0)

That 70's Feminism! When women are NOT allowed 'choice'

I certainly wasn't surprised by the NY Times running an article on the musings of college women on what the future holds for them. And I wasn't that surprised the Grey Lady could barely conceal her scandalized tones with a vapors and fainting couch headline as:

Many Women at Elite Colleges Set Career Path to Motherhood

Of course, none of the women the article are eschewing their education to just make babies and bake cookies. It just seems to come as quite a surprise to those people who believe it is their duty to dictate how these young women will live that many of the women are not phobic about their uterus and look forward to spending a few or more years raising their own children.

You know, that very nasty, fascist concept of self-responsibility.

:::GASP:::

This is amusing

"It really does raise this question for all of us and for the country: when we work so hard to open academics and other opportunities for women, what kind of return do we expect to get for that?" said Marlyn McGrath Lewis, director of undergraduate admissions at Harvard, who served as dean for coeducation in the late 1970's and early 1980's.

So, Lewis seems to think that it is she who can demand of young women she has never met exactly how they will live their life in eternal gratitude towards the elder stateswomyn of 70's feminism?

It is less than clear what universities should, or could, do about it. For one, a person's expectations at age 18 are less than perfect predictors of their life choices 10 years later. And in any case, admissions officers are not likely to ask applicants whether they plan to become stay-at-home moms.

Geez, the God of Irony is having a good laugh at that one ... women were 'kept out' of colleges way back when because their education would be "wasted" on a girl that was going to "do nothing" but have babies, and here is a hint from ostensible champions of opportunity and choice that they'd love to do the same.

"What does concern me," said Peter Salovey, the dean of Yale College, "is that so few students seem to be able to think outside the box; so few students seem to be able to imagine a life for themselves that isn't constructed along traditional gender roles."

Pity poor Peter that being dean has so ill prepared him to look at young women who have grown up in the very atmosphere where they have received messages/lectures/screeds/entertainment dedicated to ridiculing or dismissing "traditional" roles and because they don't choose as he would choose for them, he thinks the problem lies within the young women.As one reads the article one finds young women who are serious about looking at all their choices, weighing them soberly with their desires and trying to find a realistic plan of working and motherhood done serially rather than the concurrently. These are young women who understand that parents are the best people to be raising their own children. But such thinking doesn't sit well with the 70's the personal is the political crowd

"They are still thinking of this as a private issue; they're accepting it," said Laura Wexler, a professor of American studies and women's and gender studies at Yale.

Wexler is baldly stating it -- being a mother is a PUBLIC issue.

Don't ever again think for one moment that gender-feminism is about allowing women personal choice.

Posted by Darleen at 12:00 AM | Comments (0)

September 20, 2005

The Cotillion Ball XV

I am continually amazed by the women of the Cotillion. We are really a pretty diverse group but we pull together, not only on Ball days, but chat, gossip, congratulate, console, advise, empathize, swear, laugh, cry, get drunk, worry and most of all WRITE each other daily behind the scenes. Reading through the links provided by the weekly hosts it is clear the wide ranging interests we have and share with you. Please take the time to visit each host and peruse the links and find, like I have, some of the most interesting reads from a group of gals you'd love to just hang with.

Fistful of Fortnights
Soldiers' Angel - Holly Aho
Knowledge Is Power - SondraK.com
Crystal Clear

Also all four of the above can be found crossposted at the Cotillion's home site, here, here, and here.

Posted by Darleen at 06:00 AM | Comments (1)

September 19, 2005

Why the Anti-Parent rhetoric?

I swear I'm so tired of the abortion debate I want to drive the lot of screamers into the ocean. It causes normally sane people to go idiotic (hell, one male blogger I usually respect went all shrill and hysterical on me a few months back because I would NOT agree that having an abortion to avoid saggy boobs was a legitimate moral position). It causes people already emotionally involved in the debate to take to the trenches and toss grenades at each other and adopt a take-no-prisoners attitude.

Sunday I gave the NYTimes 70's retread a few lines. But it seems to have started yet another exercise or three in going after Parental notification laws.

Let me make myself clear. I support the legality of abortion at the sole discretion of an adult woman, of sound mind, within the first trimester. I will argue that the majority of such abortions are, indeed, immoral, but I believe they should remain legal. Just as I would argue that vast majority of cases of adulterous behavior is immoral, but not the province of the government.

But when it comes to minor girls and abortion, then the law must assume, like it does with any OTHER medical procedure, that a girl's parents have primary responsibility for her and all information concerning her medical condition is to be provided to them, without delay or condition, unless extenuating circumstances arise.

Period. This statement

We're not really debating parental control so much as a girl's right to abort regardless of age.

is hogwash. Does a girl have the right to a boob job regardless of age? How about a tummy tuck? Eyebrow piercing? Collegen injections? Just what other medical procedure is a minor girl entitled to by right without her parents knowledge?

I'm not talking here about parents withholding cancer treatment or life-saving transfusions ... and the law DOES have options where a parent's wishes in these regards can be overruled in a life-threatening situation.

But a girl contemplating an abortion is not in immediate danger of dying.

The vast majority of the time, the parents are not the girl's enemy. However, those adamently opposed to even the most modest and reasonable of parental notification laws paint a gaudy picture of a land dominated by abusive parents ready to pummel a little girl into a bloody mess.

Yes, teens generally hate to disappoint their parents. That's why schools mail home report cards. Is it a failure of parents that their teens may be reluctant to share bad news? Would such a typical response of teens justify a school refusing to tell parents how their child is doing with their studies?

Then why is a school allowed to let a young girl-child go off campus during school hours to have an abortion without her parents knowledge?

And not the least of it -- a significant amount of girls are impregnated by men three years or more older than them. Oppostion to parental notification laws enable these men to avoid legal responsibility.

I would like to believe that those adamently opposed to parental laws under any circumstance are just ignorant of such facts.

Posted by Darleen at 09:03 PM | Comments (2)

September 18, 2005

A fall Sunday's musings ...

I'm having a real sense of accomplishment this weekend. For a lot of people, it's spring cleaning, for me nothing beats a quiet and gorgeous fall day to clear out cobwebs within the house and within me.

Not to say that keeping the domicile within Health Department code rules is only my job. Indeed, my husband is usually much better organized and a bit more diligent about the daily clutter-busting than me. But when it comes to the deep down, scrubbing the baseboards and polishing silver stuff, I love to spend a day or two tackling it all. Vacuuming actually has an almost meditative quality to it (when the girls were babies and fussy, running the vacuum was almost as good as putting them into the car for a ride until they fell asleep).

Saturday evening, husband and I had a wonderful time at Little Miss Attila's gorgeous hillside home. It was a small informal gathering of some So. Cal BFLers. The irrepressible Flap has the lowdown on the soiree. (also, check out who Flap is betting will be GW's next SCOTUS nominee)! Thank you, Miss Attila, you and your husband are grand hosts!

I've missed blogging about the last two Battlestar Galactica episodes due to family distractions. As the season finale approaches (argh!) next week I'll do a lengthy review to make up. A couple of thoughts I've discussed with others -- IMHO it does appear that Helo's Sharon has gone 'renegade.' Final Cut had the other humanoid Cylons startled to find out she was still alive and pregnant, while this week's Flight of the Phoenix had Cmdr. Adama admitting there was common ground between Sharon and him in defeating the Cylon attack -- "We both want to live." Last Friday's episode was one of the stronger ones of the season, fully exploring the frayed nerves and deep psychological stresses on the Galatica crew while being harried prey. Yet another indication of how adult the writing is for this show. Guilty pleasure confession -- have to admit I enjoyed the scene in Final Cut were Lee Adama almost lost his towel. Rwrrr!

Speaking of the entertainment industry, Disney leaves hand-drawn animation behind is an interesting article for what it does NOT say --

The box office numbers show how far the sky has fallen. The studio reached the height of its most recent popularity with the 1994 release of "The Lion King," which brought in $764.8 million at the worldwide box office. By contrast, the last nine animated movies Disney either made or acquired took in only $758.3 million combined. "The Incredibles," the 2004 film created by Pixar, brought in $630 million - nearly as much as Disney's last eight animated movies.

In the long article not once is writing mentioned. While animators argue over technique, even the most beautifully rendered garbage is still garbage. The Incredibles did not widely succeed because it was computer-animated, but because its audience, adult and child alike, wanted to be in that world. A world created first and foremost by its writer, Brad Bird. As a dismal summer of anemic box office receipts has studios wringing their hands, no one has the chutzpah to tell these sequel/remake leeches - quite simply - write it WELL and they will come.

Also in the NYTIMES was this usual sob-sister feature Under Din of Abortion Debate, an Experience Shared Quietly ostensibly about the "front line" faces of those experiencing Abortion in America. Admittedly, it is a well-crafted, understated article. But just as Hollywood can't seem to help itself in continuing to remake old movies, this feature of girls and women faced with what they believe is the only way out of an unwanted pregnancy is the stuff of the last 30 years. It's tragic, it's heartrending and it is just another exercise that induces outrage fatigue.

One of the best things to do in case of fatigue is DANCE! And Michele at ASV comes up with the next Macarena with her slap your ass and blow a kiss to your balls dance instructions to accompany the Belgians hate America pop-song.

Hmmm... I can slap my own ass, but I think I need to go find some balls to blow a kiss to...

Later.

Posted by Darleen at 06:03 PM | Comments (0)

Sen. Mary Landrieu - 'I'll still punch the president'

click for larger image

Sen. Landrieu's most recent statements from a river in Egypt

"I do not take it back, I don't apologize for it. I said I would punch anybody, including the president."

"These local officials were heroes," she contended, before saying she meant every word of her threat.

Let's not forget, too, that the good Senator from LA also thinks it is GW's responsibility to make sure every public worker in the US gets up in the morning, on time, has a hearty breaksfast and a song in his/her heart before clocking in at work.

"Mayor Nagin and most mayors in this country have a hard time getting their people to work on a sunny day, let alone getting them out of the city in front of a hurricane," she said. "And it's because this administration and administrations before them do not understand the difficulties that mayors . . . face."

I demand federally subsidized alarm clocks! And federal troops to drive me to work! (unless, of course, they make me upset, then I can call it an 'occupation')

(h/t Michele Malkin)

Posted by Darleen at 10:30 AM | Comments (5)

September 16, 2005

American doll Sheehan sees soldiers

... and is truly troubled

One thing that truly troubled me about my visit to Louisiana was the level of the military presence there. I imagined before that if the military had to be used in a CONUS (Continental US) operations that they would be there to help the citizens: Clothe them, feed them, shelter them, and protect them. But what I saw was a city that is occupied. I saw soldiers walking around in patrols of 7 with their weapons slung on their backs. I wanted to ask one of them what it would take for one of them to shoot me. Sand bags were removed from private property to make machine gun nests.

How deep-seated, and shall we venture psychotic, is her hatred of her son's peers that causes such creepy statements?

George Bush needs to stop talking, admit the mistakes of his all around failed administration, pull our troops out of occupied New Orleans and Iraq, and excuse his self from power.

OCCUPIED New Orleans?

If George Bush truly listened to God and read the words of the Christ, Iraq and the devastation in New Orleans would have never happened.

Yes, Mommy Sheehan, if GW were a real Xtian he would have stood on the beach in Katrina's path and commanded the hurricane to stop. Yessireebob, you are a real doll, Mommy, with a plastic head as empty as anything Mattel produces.

(h/t Jeff Goldstein)

Posted by Darleen at 01:08 PM | Comments (1)

Teens and sex -- what is not being discussed?

While I may accept the statisics of this study, some of the comments are truly mindboggling:

More than half of American teens ages 15 to 19 have engaged in oral sex, increasing to nearly 70% for those who are 18 and 19, according to the largest federal study of the nation's sexual practices. ...

The data show that, among teens 15 to 19, 55% of males and 54% of females reported engaging in oral sex. Among those 18 to 19, the figure grows to about 70% for both sexes. Overall, more teens had experienced oral sex than vaginal sex: 53% of girls 15 to 19 and 49% of boys reported that they had had intercourse.

"Those teens who are less likely to have sexual intercourse are more likely to have had oral sex," said Jennifer Manlove, who directs research on fertility and family structures at Child Trends, a Washington research group on children and families. "We're not sure whether these teens … are engaging in oral sex because they view it as a way to maintain their technical virginity or even because they regard it as an 'easy' method of birth control," she said.

The emphasis over the last five years on promoting abstinence from sex has led to widespread neglect of discussions about the safety of various sexual practices, Wagoner said.

"One of the most shocking statistics now is that the incidence of teen gonorrhea in the United States is 70 times that in the Netherlands and France," he said. "We are paying a big price for shutting down discussion."

What shutdown of discussion? What the hell is this guy talking about? Is there anywhere or in any setting that teens don't hear about sex and condoms?

Posted by Darleen at 06:58 AM | Comments (2)

September 15, 2005

‘God’ in the Pledge is not a religious reference

Yesterday I cheekily compared the controversy over the Pledge of Allegiance to a B horror movie villain that is killed at the end of the movie only to be revived in the sequel. However, as I read Jeff Harrell’s piece I realized that many people of good will may have problems with the phrase specifically because they believe, as the San Francisco judge ruled, that the phrase ‘under God’ represents “a coercive affirmation of the existence of God”, i.e. it is always a religious reference and, thus, cannot be used in any “state” setting.

There are three major points that need addressing:

1. Is the word ‘God’ an absolute religious reference, regardless of context?
2. Must children always be fully cognizant of the reasons and history behind any action that their parents or teachers may require of them?
3. Does tradition or ritual have any role in the greater good of society or the nation?

No, no, and yes. That’s the short stuff, how I arrived at those answers is across the jump.

1. As long time readers know about me, I am pretty adamant about how all things must be considered within context. If I use the word “bitch”, it makes a world of difference if I’m addressing it in anger against a woman or I’m discussing bloodlines with a dog breeder. It is the context in which one finds the word “God” which determines whether it is a religious expression or not.

Now I’m sure I’ll be asked, “But don’t you find it insulting that someone even tries to say the phrase ‘one Nation under God’ is not a religious phrase? Aren’t you then reducing God?” This is a sophist argument by attempting to impose on others one’s own absolutist argument rather than offering one’s own points of debate. Categorically, I reject that “one Nation under God” is a religious phrase in the context of the Pledge of Allegiance. It is as religious as the philosophical argument made by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence:

“We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.”

Yes, there is an element of religiosity, but the most important declaration is that men cannot usurp the basic rights of man even as they may seize power and suppress their neighbors. Man has rights granted by an authority higher than men. King or pauper, our rights are equally bestowed.

The Pledge is but a reiteration of this basic, founding statement. “One Nation under God” is “One People (e pluribus unum) with rights as endowed by a Creator”. It is not a Pledge to the Government, but a Pledge we make as Americans, one to each other. It is an affirmation of the foundational values of the Republic. The Lord’s Prayer would be ‘coercive affirmation of God’ because one is praying to God. But one does not “pray to God” in the Pledge.

There are those that point out the “youth” of the phase ‘under God’ in the Pledge, as it appeared in 1954 during the Cold War. Usually the last pointed out in a deliberate effort to discredit the Pledge as part of the ‘Red Scare’ 50’s. Such people either choose to ignore the era or never lived through it. The ‘dismissal of the Soviets as a real threat’ historical revisionism is a topic for another time; however, it is true that the phrase WAS a response, but only as I have pointed out – to differentiate between a society in which rights to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness are Man’s alone, neither granted nor withdrawn by other men vs. a society in which each individual’s existence was affirmed only by the whim or pleasure of other men. Individualism vs. collectivism. Ends vs. means.

2. It is either a blessing or a curse that I have very vivid childhood memories. Not just of places and events but of what I was thinking at the time. As most children, I resented many of the things I had to do that I didn’t understand or didn’t accept the reasoning. Why couldn’t I have more than 2 cookies with my milk after school? Why did I have to do my homework before I went out to play? Under the dark frown that bespoke “I don’t like mom’s answer” was the thought “well, when I have children I’m not going to …”

Funny thing happened, I grew up, had kids, and then realized all the reasons why I needed to do to my kids just as my parents did to me.

As a parent I realized while it is a good thing for me to explain to my kids “why” if they don’t accept my explanation, I am not obligated to convince them. I AM the parent. I see the long-term benefits of certain activities (eating one’s veggies, adhering to a bed time, dressing appropriately for school) that children resist because they live in the ‘now’, not the years from now.

Just look at the American University system and all the fluff courses that came about in the late 60’s when the children started demanding “relevancy” and the adults rolled over. My generation has blurred the differences between child and adult (and in some instances, elevated child over adult) and IMHO, it hasn’t enhanced society at all.

A small child may not fully understand the political philosophy behind the Pledge, any more than the philosophy underpinning the Declaration of Independence. But reciting it, knowing the words by heart, is like a child doing beginning piano lessons. At some point an epiphany occurs and the words, so well known, have meaning, just like practicing the scales trains the fingers to seek out the right notes when a child is ready for more difficult pieces. We don’t sit down a 15 y/o at the piano with a Tchaikovsky concerto and say “you’re now mature enough to understand this music… go for it” and we shouldn’t apply the same approach to household chores or American values.

3. Tradition and/or ritual are activities that bind us emotionally to each other; as couples, families, communities or nations. For instance, take the ritual of “politeness.” Is society better or worse with generally accepted rituals of politeness? Should teachers be addressed by their first names by their students? Should a young person be taught to give up his/her bus seat to a senior citizen or pregnant woman?

We teach (or should teach) our children ritual politeness even if they don’t feel it or understand it because, frankly, it makes society tolerable. Robert Heinlein observed that politeness is the oil that keeps the usually rough gears of society lubricated. Does it make sense to have to seek a reason to be polite to each person and stranger one encounters during the day or should the ritual of politeness be automatic unless there is some evident reason to suspend the politeness?

Why do we have weddings? Family dinners? Why do we have elected officials even take an Oath of Office?

Because the tradition of public affirmation, of shared values, of mutual respect inculcates a feeling of good will and trust among individuals.

This is wrong...how? Oh. Yes. Because of the hypocrisy.

Feh.

In that matter, the Pledge of Allegiance serves a three-fold purpose. For children, it is a teaching tool, the simplest introduction to the values of an American citizen. Its tradition of standing and recitation is a respect shown to the Nation, aka the People, as surely as giving up one’s bus seat to an elderly person. And it is the simplest form of pubic affirmation of basic American values that one can make at any public gathering where a color guard strikes the flag, reminding us that we are Americans not just because of an accident of birth, but by a voluntary acceptance of the values upon which the Republic was formed.

The Pledge is not about God or the Government. It is about citizenship and respect for ourselves and our fellow Americans.

Posted by Darleen at 12:37 PM | Comments (6)

September 14, 2005

From the email -- Not going to take it anymore!

There are just those days when you really feel like ....

Posted by Darleen at 08:59 PM | Comments (0)

Halloween comes a bit early to Frisco - the reanimation of the 'pledge' controversy

Just like the character Michael that keeps coming back in those Halloween movies (what was the last one? Halloween 28: Grandson's Second Cousin Twice Removed Revenge?) The so-called controversy over the Pledge of Allegiance just won't stay dead. Of COURSE it would be a judge in the Great Moonbat Land aka San Francisco who today would rule:

SAN FRANCISCO - A federal judge declared the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools unconstitutional Wednesday in a case brought by the same atheist whose previous battle against the words "under God" was rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court on procedural grounds.

U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton ruled that the pledge's reference to one nation "under God" violates school children's right to be "free from a coercive requirement to affirm God."

Let me get this right...it is OK to discuss AIDS in detail with six year olds, but the same kidlet will be irreparably harmed by just hearing (since no one is obligated to SAY) those two words in the Pledge of Allegiance?

Some "parents" need smacking about the head and shoulders.

Posted by Darleen at 01:05 PM | Comments (2)

Los Angeles mandates safe corners for prosititutes

LOS ANGELES:

Los Angeles would become one of the first major cities in the nation to require big liquor stores located near corners to create shelters for prostitutes under a recently drafted city ordinance that takes aim at regulating the controversial issue.

The move comes as city leaders seek to aid a growing number of prostitutes who gather at such stores to solicit customers and to quell rising community concern about loitering, security and other effects on neighborhoods.

"This multimillion-dollar business ignores the fact that these problems are created by the stores," said City Councilman Bernard Parks, who has proposed the ordinance.

Of course what I've posted above from the LA Daily News has been slightly altered. Instead of prostitutes, what Los Angeles has done is to pass an ordinance to require stores like Home Depot to build shelters for ILLEGAL ALIENS soliciting day labor.

"It's an incredible issue for urban California," said Fernando Guerra, a lobbyist for Home Depot and professor who heads Loyola Marymount University's Center for the Study of Los Angeles.

Guerra, who said he was speaking for himself and not Home Depot, said that designated shelters might drive some day laborers away because of factors like competition for jobs. That could cause other problems, he said, which could require police enforcement and lead to legal issues.

"I'm not against day labor sites, because they actually offer amenities and some assistance for day laborers," Guerra said. "The question becomes, how do we make them work, and this ordinance does not address that at all. It says, hey, do a day labor site; we've washed our hands."

What's the problem here? Any "day laborer" here ILLEGALLY has no business BEING HERE, let alone SOLICITING TO WORK ILLEGALLY.

Thank you, Los Angeles City Council for yet another way to erase the southern border and show your contempt for the AMERICAN citizens who elect you.

Prostitutes offer better value than you and don't pretend what they do is legal.

Posted by Darleen at 07:10 AM | Comments (0)

September 13, 2005

We DO have 3 political parties in the USA - Dems, Repubs and the MSM

And the MSM pretends to be "objective" even when they offer blatant headlines like this

Roberts Dodges Specifics on Abortion

WASHINGTON - Supreme Court nominee John Roberts jousted with Democratic senators Tuesday at his confirmation hearing to be chief justice, dodging their attempts to pin down his opinions on abortion, voting rights and other legal issues.

Roberts said he felt the landmark 1973 ruling legalizing abortion was "settled as a precedent" and that the Constitution provides a right to privacy.

But when senators pressed for details on his opinions — even to the point of interrupting his answers — Roberts said repeatedly that he shouldn't address some issues that could come before the Supreme Court with him as chief justice.

Obviously, anyone who has even a fleeting acquaintence with the Ruth Ginsberg confirmation hearings understands Roberts' answer was the only proper one to give.

At one point, Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., who has indicated he may run for president in 2008, accused Roberts of "filibustering."

"Go ahead and continue not to answer," said Biden. Later, he interrupted Roberts and when criticized, insisted, "His answers are misleading, with all due respect."

Looks like Biden has been losing his memory as fast has he has lost his hair. Compare his perfidious slams against Roberts with his own statements from the Ruth Ginsberg hearings:

Biden said “the public is best served by questions that initiate a dialog with the nominee, not about how she will decide any specific case that may come before her, but about the spirit and the method she will bring to the task of judging. There is a real difference … between questions that focus on specific results or outcomes, the answers to which would risk compromising a nominee’s independence and impartiality, and questions on judicial methods and philosophy. The former can undermine the dispassionate and unprejudiced judgment we expect the nominee to exercise as a Justice. But the latter are essential and contribute critically to our public dialog.”

With the AP so fully in the Dem corner and doing politicking masquaraded as "reporting", do they come under the McCain-Feingold?

Posted by Darleen at 01:01 PM | Comments (1)

The Cotillion Ball XIV

It's Tuesday and the ladies of The Cotillion offer up a series of posts you will find deal mostly with 9/11 or Katrina. Take a few moments to peruse these extraordinary thoughts and remembrances.

TFS Magnum
e-Claire
Portia Rediscovered
Mary Katharine Ham / Townhall C-Log

Thank you, ladies.

Posted by Darleen at 06:38 AM | Comments (0)

September 12, 2005

Happy Anniversary to Storyblogging Carnival!

Please stop by the Storyblogging Carnival #27 which marks the first year anniversary of this unique carnival.

I haven't personally submitted my own fiction there in a while, but I enjoy visiting on Carnival days and reading what's offered.

Good show, Donald, and I hope the carnival continues for a long, long time.

Posted by Darleen at 03:40 PM | Comments (0)

RoP™ burns synagogues and the Brits kiss moslem ass

Can't you feel the love?

NEVE DEKALIM, Gaza Strip - Jubilant Palestinians planted flags on the rubble of Jewish settlements and set synagogues ablaze on Monday as Israeli troops pulled out of the Gaza Strip after 38 years of occupation. "This is a day of happiness and joy that the Palestinian people have not witnessed for a century," President Mahmoud Abbas told reporters in Gaza City.

Their only disappointment was there were no Jews burning inside those synagogues.

And it looks as if whatever quisling gene infects the perps of the Giant Ground Zero Heist is also present in some of Tony Blairs "advisors" trying to gut a Holocaust Memorial Day*

ADVISERS appointed by Tony Blair after the London bombings are proposing to scrap the Jewish Holocaust Memorial Day because it is regarded as offensive to Muslims.

They want to replace it with a Genocide Day that would recognise the mass murder of Muslims in Palestine(sic), Chechnya and Bosnia as well as people of other faiths.

Nevermind there has been no genocide of moslems in "Palestine" (hence my "sic").

What gives with certain segments of people in Western Civilization bent on helping those that would happily slit their throats and burn down everything offensive in the eyes of, ahem, Allah? Do they honestly think this Let's pretend WWII didn't happen and the Jews don't exist meme will prevent further bombings?

Churchill is rolling in his grave.

(*h/t Scribal Terror via Jeff Goldstein)

Posted by Darleen at 07:47 AM | Comments (0)

September 11, 2005

For leftard f*ckwits who still blame Bush for Katrina

I can keep pointing to Jeff Goldstein and his myriad of articles over the past week, all sourced (imagine that!) but I guess I can't make the Reality Based Community actually read -- all about the cognitive dissonance and all --

Today's most righteous sushi chef moment from Jeff ends with this addressed to the Left acolytes' beloved Kevin Drum:

Note that Kevin's list of FEMA failures are not actually FEMA failures;unsurprising, in that Kevin has shown throughout this ordeal a reluctance to let facts get in the way of partisanship. And sadly, he seems not to care about what FEMA's function is. For instance, FEMA is responsible for coordinating with the Red Cross, who themselves note that they were kept out by the local government; that FEMA isn't in charge of the evacuation plans (and that the Convention Center wasn't included in evacuation plans); that FEMA mobilized buses from outside the region even while those inside remained untouched; that Northcom was on the scene almost immediately via the USS Bataan (which he really should have known, as he posted testimony to that effect from a Northcom spokesman, and news reports confirm that rescue missions were being flown right after the hurricane moved inland).

Conclusion? Kevin must be positioning himself for a gig at Newsweek.

Ouch. That one is going to leave a mark.

Posted by Darleen at 12:18 PM | Comments (7)

9/11 - More thoughts and links with UPDATE

One of the things I love about being a member of The Cotillion is the sense of shared community. We email and chat amongst ourselves - pointing out things to read, cheering on good news, offering comfort in the face of bad news. Today strikes us all differently ... certainly there is a plethora of memorials being held. Many of us will go to church this morning knowing the services will be held in memory of 9/11. And many of us will experience, as one of my Cotillion sisters described, a kind of free-floating depression akin to what one experiences after the death of a loved one. What I wrote partially in reply was

We all come to this anniversary differently. Some will write, some will just remember quietly, some will be in parades, some will -unfortunately- take the opportunity to spew hate.

9/11 united us only briefly; however, today it stands as a bellweather of values. There are those that come away from it with a greater understanding of the uniqueness of the American experiment - its greatness and its fragility - and commit ourselves to supporting America. Then there those that once the shock of 9/11 wore off practically revel in the 'I told you so!'s because they truly feel America's uniqueness is wrong. THEY exist in a strange place where they believe if America is NOT the perfect utopia of THEIR dreams, each wart, each failure, each less-than, is just more proof of the basic evilness of America. It's weirdly puritanical - people so religiously bound to the thought that humans (America) are basically evil they can never ever credit the good but see evil machinations in any unscripted moment - they feel they have to be "on guard" to point out the evil foibles of their family and neighbors REGARDLESS OF FACT.

And it's the latter group that just emotionally exhausts the former sometimes, so I can fully see where some people are just going to retreat from their 'puters and newspapers today so they don't have to read/listen to the hatefilled idiots who will start each bit with "Yes, 9/11 was tragic BUT..."

I really have little problem standing aside and letting the leftard jihadists engage in their reality-challenged hatevomit. When people insist on making themselves a bloody fool in public, why interfere? They are the kind of people who can look at this and shrug their shoulders. It's not that they don't Get It, it's that they Refuse To Get It.

For the rest of us, the following links are excellent:

Michele Catalano(who also has been linking to her posts from 9/2001)
Michelle Malkin who asks "So the MSM wants to see bodies?" and a great link roundup
Charles Johnson multiple things - look down the left sidebar
Eric at Classical Values quote of the day: "It's our country, and if it's worth defending against hurricanes, it's even more worth defending against terrorism."
Capt. Ed "...I discovered that the so-called outpouring of global sympathy in the wake of these attacks was a myth."
Da Goddess "Go hug someone you love today and thank the heavens you live in a country that answers the call for help."
Beth at MVRWC good quotes and knockout pics
Chris Muir Heh.
Hugh Hewitt "Heroes of the Long War"
Thanks to Mustang 23 for the WTC pic at the top.

UPDATE Jeff Harrell does a yeoman's job of finding those other 9/11 "remembrances."

Posted by Darleen at 09:39 AM | Comments (1)

9/11 Essay: In praise of the Ordinary Life - repost

*Author's note: I wrote this last year, less than two weeks after I started blogging. I had, maybe, five readers? Now over 1000 people a day stop by to visit. In rereading what I wrote I find my basic wish the same, so I offer it to you, dear reader, because I feel exactly the same way today as a year ago. And please, take the time to visit here

I’ve spent this past week thinking about what I would write today. For me, as for many, September 11, 2001, is the seminal moment of my adult life. It has shaped me. It has shaped my approach to the macro issues surrounding my country and the world in which it exists. Whether or not I am consciously aware of the profundity of 9/11 as I read world news or debate with others on the Internet or in the flesh, I can look back at the person I was on 9/10/01 and realize the path I’m now on is not the one I was following then.

Words. Millions of words will be written today. Words that will recount exactly where we were, what we were doing, how we felt as we heard the words. For me, here in California, it was being barely asleep as the clock radio went off, tuned to my usual morning station KFI640 AM and hearing host Bill Handel say, “We’ve just gotten a report that a plane has hit the World Trade Center.”

Time stopped. Time has never been the same.

However, let me move beyond that. Move beyond the remembering of that horrible day. So many people will be writing and speaking today with words more eloquent than mine of their own experience. They will speak to history of witnessing it and of their loved ones lost in it. Others will not speak today, choosing to remember quietly, in reverent silence and in an effort not to be consumed in a reliving of the horror still too close.

September 11, 2001, was an ordinary day. It was a day filled by ordinary tasks. Parents frustrated by dawdling youngsters. Commuters musing on where they’d have lunch that day and if they had time to stop for coffee before getting to the office. Turn on the tv, turn on the radio, listen for the weather, listen for the traffic report. Mommy, I can’t find my homework! Mommy, he’s making faces at me again, tell him to stop! Sweetie? Have you seen my blue tie? Hon, that went to the cleaners. Oh, can you pick up the cleaning on the way home today, I have a late meeting and won’t be able….

“Woke up, fell out of bed
Dragged a comb across my head
Found my way downstairs and drank a cup
And looking up I noticed I was late
Found my coat and grabbed my hat
Made the bus in seconds flat
Found my way upstairs and had a smoke
Somebody spoke and I went into a dream.”

I want the ordinariness back. I really enjoy a life of family and work and books and home. I raise my children to be good people. I volunteer in my community to give back when others can’t. I’ve been a Band Booster mom, a Soccer mom and a PTA mom. I’ve organized fundraisers. I’ve organized donations to help my neighbors through tragedy. I was a Girl Scout and always buy their cookies. I’ve taught my daughters how to ride a bike and crochet a scarf. I’ve sewed Halloween costumes and prom dresses. I’ve hosted exchange students and been there for my children’s friends when they needed an adult’s ear. My own life has had its triumphs and tragedies but was never centered upon forcing change on my neighbors to conform to my way of life.

I’m part of those great-unwashed masses that is sneered at for the sheer middle-class ordinariness of my life.

I don’t revel in the changes in this country. I don’t gleefully caper on the bodies of the victims of 9/11 as proof of America’s evilness as too many others do. I don’t dismiss whole segments of the country because the people living there don’t wear the same clothes or listen to the same music as I do.

I want my ordinariness back, not by retreating into 9/10/01 and pretending 9/11/01 didn’t happen. Or by trying to dismiss it by saying it was Yes.it.was.Tragic.BUT. (ah … that magic “but” that lets you know the preceeding words are going to be negated by the following words.)

I want my ordinariness back by going through 9/11. Faced dead on, fully experienced, fully remembered and as the impetus to fight, not only for the ordinariness of my life, but also for the ordinariness of the future lives of my children and grandchildren. How nice when my grandsons start kindergarten that the biggest worry their mom will have is if they will like their teacher, not about if the school is a target for terrorists. How nice will it be if each approaching American holiday my grandsons’ experience will be excitement at the celebration with BBQ’s and fireworks, not threat levels and heightened security.

I realize I want to secure that ordinariness for them, as my parents and grandparents wanted the ordinariness for me when they faced fighting the fascism of their time.

It is an extraordinary responsibility that faces my generation; to both recognize the modern fascist ideology of Islamism, and to be dedicated to defeating it. And the defeat will not only be on battlefields, but will come within our hearts. It will come in defeating the nihilism that permeates our culture and holds us of the ordinary life responsible for the evilness of others. It is not easy and we will be tested again and again; but can we do less than what was asked of our parents and grandparents?

Today, I fly my flag, I offer my prayers to those lost and those that remain behind, I praise and feel pride in the men and women who are giving so much to me by being in United States Armed Forces.

Most of all, I wish for all my fellow citizens is a future of ordinariness.

Posted by Darleen at 12:01 AM | Comments (9)

September 10, 2005

Saturday reading - Prayer, P0rn and Walmart

Michele at ASV has a very gracious and common-sense post addressed to her fellow atheists/agnostics who are giving themselves wedgies over the President's declaration of a National Day of Prayer. My advice to the members of the Church of the Easily Offended? Get.Over.It.Already.

Jeff Harrell's x-rated fundraiser is still on roll. He's raised over $300 and heck, the weekend has only started!

Jeff Goldstein easily fisks an unbelievably stupid Huffington Post entry whining about how Walmart just hasn't done enough for Katrina victims.

... what is so remarkably imbecilic about this piece of anti-corporatist agit prop is that it literally belittles an American company for providing 1.6 million jobs, for giving over $20 in direct relief aid (a figure that doesn’t include the $34 million in displaced worker stipends, the $4 million collected from the public in Wal-Mart stores, use of Wal-Mart facilities and its distribution fleet (the best in the world), the manpower hours (both paid and volunteer) involved in aiding the relief efforts, their policy of pre-staging for disaster relief (which insures an instant response), the 150 computers donated to shelters, nor the free products available to those in the hardest hit areas). ...

But when Sean Penn brings a camera crew and a personal photographer down to LA to film himself rowing his little boat in the floodwaters—which provides him the platform for yet another anti-Bush screed—we’re to consider him heroic?

Sigh. Just another flailing from the usual members of the Reality Based Community™ who see even natural disasters are part of the Vast Rightwing/Xtain/Zionist/Haliburton Conspiracy to get rid of the poor (yet another tolerant and diverse Leftwing site that fully allows other voices to be heard ... ahem).

Posted by Darleen at 11:44 AM | Comments (7)

September 09, 2005

Robert W. Rippel, Jr. Update

I've been away from my 'puter for a couple of days. With all the Sheehanification of Katrina by the emoting Reality Based Community™ as of late (don't confuse 'em with facts, nothing is more important than "IMAGE"), I felt that it was best to just step back for a couple of days to be with family and share all the memories -- and tears and laughter -- as yet another chapter in my life closed. Some of the highlights of Bobby's life can be found here. Excerpt:

Robert William Rippel Jr., 77, passed away Saturday, Sept. 3, 2005, with his family by his side.

Bob was born April 4, 1928, in Los Angeles to Robert W. Rippel Sr. and Mildred Rippel. Bob was an outstanding athlete who especially excelled at football. While at Dorsey High School, he was chosen for the Los Angeles All-City First Football Team. He was also a four-year football letterman at Arizona State University and signed a contract with the San Francisco 49ers, of the National Football League, in 1955.

A four-year tour of duty in the Navy put an end to Bob's professional football career before it ever started. While stationed at the U.S. Naval Air Station on Coronado Island in San Diego, Bob played football and wrestled on Navy teams. He was named Football Player of the Year of the 11th Naval District, and he placed third as a heavyweight in the National AAU Wrestling Championships.

That hardly scratches the surface of the life that Bobby lead, a man devoted to his family and who kept the friends he made. At the reception we watched an awesome DVD put together by one of the many young men who are close friends with his son, my cousin, Greg and who hung out at Bob and Mary Ann's place as adopted members of the family. We all got up at points and spoke of special memories. Two of the remaining members of Bob's childhood friends were on hand, too, testimony to Bob's devotion to keeping the friends he made.

The reception at the Malibu Country Club was just what Bobby wanted. No gloom but a party, like all the backyard BBQ's he loved to throw. We ate, we drank, we laughed and we swapped stories.

And hugging was rampant.

Tell me not in mournful numbers,
"Life is but an empty dream!"
For the soul is dead that slumbers,
And things are not what they seem.

Life is real! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal;
"Dust thou art, to dust returnest,"
Was not spoken of the soul.

~~Longfellow

Bobby lived life earnestly, no matter the sorrows that crossed it, and left it rich in the lives he so wonderfully touched. May we all be so blessed.

Posted by Darleen at 09:11 AM | Comments (0)

Not for the shy - Making lemonade out of psychos

Jeff Harrell yanks the rug out from under a jealous/psycho stalker and amazingly raises money for the Red Cross at the same time.

Fair warning, can be graphic (as in X-rated) but my admiration for the man just went up some significant notches.

BTW... I donated $25 at his Red Cross button. You?

Posted by Darleen at 08:51 AM | Comments (6)

September 06, 2005

The Cotillion Ball returns!

Katrina may have delayed us one week, but the fiesty, sassy ladies of the Cotillion have gathered again today to present you with a collection of writings showcasing the talents and, yes dare I say diversity, of ideas in this great group of gals. We decided our theme would revolve around heros. Today's featured hosts are:

annika's journal
Girl on the Right
Merri Musings
Not a Desperate Housewife

You can visit them individually above, or visit at The Cotillion's Home Page.

Posted by Darleen at 06:38 AM | Comments (0)

September 05, 2005

Why Leftard jihadists are having coniptions over Katrina

The whole of their argument that Katrina is All Bush's Fault! finds them arguing they are disappointed that Bush didn't act like the Constitution-ignoring-power-hungry-DICTATOR who would unceremoniously shove Gov. Blanco and Mayor Nagin aside, usurp their own state-mandated evacuation plans, seize power illegally and militarize the Gulf prior to Katrina's fall.

They want him to have acted like they've always accused him of acting.

No wonder they don't want to be confused with actual facts.

Fuckwits.

Posted by Darleen at 05:27 PM | Comments (10)

'Tribes' -- must read essay

by Bill Whittle. Excerpt:

I’m generally an optimist, and it’s been my pleasure to be able to write mostly about the good and the noble things in our lives. But the events in the Gulf – of Mexico – have brought to a head a summer and a year that has been getting progressively uglier and more painful to watch. ...

I believe that the human animal – the raw material of our physical bodies – is essentially interchangeable. By this I mean that I could take the children of Fallujah and turn them all into Astronauts, convert Jewish babies into fanatical, mass-murdering SS guards, and shake a generation of the poorest Voodoo-worshippers in Haiti into a cadre of top-flight nuclear physicists, chemical engineers and computer scientists.

Race has nothing to do with this – precisely nothing. The mobs of murdering Hutus and swarms of slaughtering Serbs are as different racially as it is possible to be, and they are cut from precisely the same cloth.

I know this is so because there have been murdering scumbags of every stripe and color in the long history of the human race – which is depressing – and that these animals, at any given time, represent only a small percentage of the majority of people, also of every stripe and color – which is not. There is no corner on virtue, and no outpost of depravity. Human hearts are indistinguishable and interchangeable. Anyone who claims otherwise is, without further argument or statements necessary, a complete God-damned idiot. ...

Only a few minutes ago, I had the delightful opportunity to read the comment of a fellow who said he wished that white, middle-class, racist, conservative cocksuckers like myself could have been herded into the Superdome Concentration Camp to see how much we like it. Absent, of course, was the fundamental truth of what he plainly does not have the eyes or the imagination to see, namely, that if the Superdome had been filled with white, middle-class, racist, conservative cocksuckers like myself, it would not have been a refinery of horror, but rather a citadel of hope and order and restraint and compassion.

That has nothing to do with me being white. If the blacks and Hispanics and Jews and gays that I work with and associate with were there with me, it would have been that much better. That’s because the people I associate with – my Tribe – consists not of blacks and whites and gays and Hispanics and Asians, but of individuals who do not rape, murder, or steal. My Tribe consists of people who know that sometimes bad things happen, and that these are an opportunity to show ourselves what we are made of. My people go into burning buildings.

Please read the whole thing. I'll wait.

Posted by Darleen at 09:58 AM | Comments (3)

Mayor Nagin -- un-f*cking-believable

I read this and thought it had to be ScrappleFace.

NEW ORLEANS, Sept. 4 - A day after two police suicides and the abrupt resignations or desertions of up to 200 police officers, defiant city officials on Sunday began offering five-day vacations - and even trips to Las Vegas - to the police, firefighters and city emergency workers and their families. ...

Mr. Nagin, who has been demanding more federal assistance for days as his city struggled with despair, death and flooding, said he had asked the Federal Emergency Management Agency to pay for the trips but the agency said it could not. He said the city, therefore, would pay the costs.

This boob ignored his city's own Evacuation Plan, almost TWO THIRDS of his police force fade into the woodwork and Nagin says:

He said he believed there were now enough National Guard members in the city to allow the police to take a break and still keep the city secure, and he brushed off questions about whether such a trip might look like a dereliction of duty.

"I'll take the heat on that," Mr. Nagin said. "We want to cater to them."

Strange, I don't remember Rudy sending NYPD cops and their families to Vegas or Atlantic City on 9/18/2001. Infact, I don't remember NYPD cops abandoning their posts either.

Officials said they expected the military, with much greater resources, to expand rescue work, begin cleaning up the city and take the first steps toward reconstruction. ...

New Orleans officials said they would remain in charge. Mr. Riley, who has been on the police force for 24 years, will oversee the police department in the superintendent's absence.

"We haven't turned over control of the city," Colonel Ebbert said.

What more can I say? I've heard of the fabled corruption of the city government of New Orleans, but this is so baldfaced as to border on parody.

Abso-fucking-amazing.

(h/t Bryan Preston for Michelle Malkin)

Posted by Darleen at 08:30 AM | Comments (0)

September 04, 2005

New Orleans Mayor Nagin -- Two questions, sir.

This is what mayor Nagin said Thusday, 9/1

Mayor Ray Nagin's voice cracked with anger and anguish Thursday night in an interview with New Orleans radio station ...

"I need reinforcements," he pleaded. "I need troops, man. I need 500 buses, man. This is a national disaster... I've done it all man, and I'll tell you man, I keep hearing that it's coming. This is coming, that is coming. And my answer to that today is BS, where is the beef? Because there is no beef in this city ... Get every Greyhound bus in the country and get them moving."

Point of order, Mayor Nagin? Would you explain for us please why these 205 buses of YOURS (and these are the ones we know about)

Click for larger images

... are just sitting in their parking lot, now being a source of pollution? Which 16,000 people were not evacuated because you didn't use them?

Oh. I see. It's a plot by Karl Rove. check

hattip to Junkyard Blog via LGF

Posted by Darleen at 10:20 AM | Comments (7)

'I wouldn't pick them up because they were black'

I had no idea how deeply my hate ran. My lack of an interaction, with a black is still haunting me a couple of hours later.

I was on my home and was on the ramp getting off the highway. I saw a mini-van on the side of the road. There was a lady standing next to the van and in her arms she held her child. I can only assume her mini-van had broken down. I don't know, perhaps with so many gad stations being out of gas, she had also run out. I slowed down and started to pull over to offer her a ride. As they turned to face me, I could see they were black and I sped up and drove off. I feel really bad as a human being. So why am I writing this? I really feel bad about passing this child and not picking up their mother.

Utterly shocking and despicable. I'm always amazed at what deep down group hate can do to people, what pathologies that kind of blind, unreasonable hate engenders in people. The writer doesn't even say s/he called an appropriate agency to respond.

Agreed?

Well, the about quote is real except the mother and child were not passed up because they were black, but because the mom's van had a "W" sticker on it.

The Left long ago surpassed the Clinton-hating rightwing nutcases with their own BushDerangementSyndrome. The writer, a walking asshole of the first order, is yet another perfect example of Leftard jihadists.

And I guess the term federalism doesn't mean a fuck this writer, anymore than the US helping moslems (ie Kosovo, Iraq, Kuwaitt)means a fuck to Islamist jihadists.

Those of us not in the cult are infidels to be converted, suppressed or killed.

The Left and Islamists -- cut from the warp and woof of the same totaltarian cloth.

Posted by Darleen at 09:16 AM | Comments (1)

September 03, 2005

In Loving Memory

Robert W. Rippel, Jr.
April 4, 1928 - September 3, 2005

I miss you, uncle Bobby.

Posted by Darleen at 10:16 PM | Comments (0)

September 02, 2005

Katrina -- good news

Michele at A Small Victory has been Blogging the Good. Check it out.

Posted by Darleen at 07:36 AM | Comments (1)

Kiss my ass

Some little fucking leftard jihadist left this comment in the previous post

This hurricane has exposed every single flaw of the conservative dream for a Darwinian paradise. It is the end of conservatism in America as we know it.

It's such a pile of poo it's almost a non-sequitor. Conservative dream for a Darwinian paradise? Whaa? The more I stare at the line the deeper I find the meaning of the commenter's own pathology.

Obviously, he didn't get the memo that Conservatives don't go for Darwin. end of conservativism in America as we know it -- end of conservatism as we know it, or end of America as we know it? Lefty jihadists can't quite figure that out. They've always had a 'socialist' dream for America quite at odds with basic American values and the individualism (which cannot exist without property rights) embodied in the Constitution and that used to be part of a classical liberal Democratic party found now mostly in the Republican party. 'Course the jihad-against-all-people-not-leftists element has been the most vocal of the Dems for a while... why else would Howard Dean be chair?

Amazing how ironically challenged are such people who ostensibly make a big deal about "diversity" as long as it deals with any demographic/trait except IDEAS. Ooohoo... don't be ideologically pure and off with your head!.

Kinda like Darwin, eh?

Posted by Darleen at 07:14 AM | Comments (4)

September 01, 2005

Those who indecently blame Bush for Katrina

are just as despicable, and as deranged, as the asshole/criminal "Repent America" group that claims Katrina is God's wrath for New Orleans "decadence" and gay-friendliness and Islamists declaring Private Katrina is part of the jihad.

All of you? Shut up. Shut the fuck up and crawl back under the rocks from which you first slithered.

Posted by Darleen at 01:11 PM | Comments (14)