May 09, 2004
May 08, 2004
So if 650 prisoners are being released from Abu Ghraib within a two week period...
That's 650, obviously not guilty or no longer in need of detention.
I guess that means they were there because???? What? They had nice asses maybe?
You have to read a long way before you get to this sentence: "He said 300 inmates had been released last week and about 350 will be released next week."
Go on home boys--and thanks for the memories.
I guess that means they were there because???? What? They had nice asses maybe?
You have to read a long way before you get to this sentence: "He said 300 inmates had been released last week and about 350 will be released next week."
Go on home boys--and thanks for the memories.
Havin' My Baby....
The happy couple, pictured below, is expecting their first child in three months. Who's throwing the baby shower?
Attorney Roy G. Hardy, who appeared with family members Friday, said England is five months pregnant and that Graner is the father.
Attorney Roy G. Hardy, who appeared with family members Friday, said England is five months pregnant and that Graner is the father.
Congress Questions President Clinton in Abu Ghraib Probe
In a surprise move, before adjourning for the weekend, Congress called President Bill Clinton to testify regarding reports that American soldiers abused Iraqi prisoners at a facility made notorious for torture during the regime of Saddam Hussein.
President Clinton's testimony followed that of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who accepted complete responsibility for the misconduct among the guards at Abu Ghraib prison, and offered his apology. "I feel terrible about what happened to these Iraqi detainees," Rumsfeld said. "They're human beings."
Rumsfeld quickly amended his comment, adding, "Well, they're like human beings, except that they're actually desert monkeys."
After excusing Rumsfeld for the day, Congress called former President Bill Clinton to offer testimony on the controversial photos from Abu Ghraib. Mr. Clinton was summoned from his hotel at about 6:00 p.m. by representatives from a bi-partisan commission tasked with uncovering the facts and reporting their findings to the international community. The former Preisdent took the stand shortly after 6:15.
President Clinton faced tough questions from both Democrat and Republican members of Congress during his two-hour testimony. The transcript of the question and answer session follows.
-----begin transcript report-------
Q. Hello President Clinton. Thank you for joining us here today. I hope we haven't inconvenienced you by asking that you appear today.
A. Well, to be honest, I'm not quite sure why I'm here, since I left office four years ago.
Q. President Clinton, what did you know and when did you know it?
A. I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. It really all depends. I mean, I had no idea she was under age if that's what you mea....
Q. No, Mr. Clinton, we're speaking about Abu Ghraib--the torture photos from Abu Ghraib. What did you know and when did you know it?
A. Oh, that! Oh. I see. Well, that question is rather difficult to answer, because I don't have any information from, or any influence within, the current administra....
Q. Mr. Clinton, please answer the question. Certainly you were informed--you have had some role--in this administration's efforts in Iraq. Please tell us what you know about the photos, the soldiers involved in these acts, and the individuals involved in photographing and distributing these pictures. Certainly you are aware of the photographs.
A. Well, I've seen them online, just like the rest of America, and on CNN, but if you're asking whether or not I had any foreknowledge on the photos then I'd have to....
Q. YES, Mr. Clinton. That is what we're asking. What was your role--YOUR ROLE--as far as the photographs and video tapes that have emerged from Abu Ghraib in the last several days.
A. My role?
Q. Yes, you're role.
A. I don't think I had any role in...
Q. No, of course you didn't have any rolls--only digital cameras were involved, Mr. Clinton. Digital cameras do not require rolls of film or photo-processing. Do you understand digital photography, Mr. Clinton?
A. Well, I've taken some photographs of Chelsea with my Sony digital camera, so yes, I know about as much about digital cameras as any American...
Q. As much as any American SOLDIER, Mr. Clinton? Do you know as much about using a digital camera as the typical American S-O-L-D-I-E-R?
A. I really don't understand what's going...
Q. We're asking for the truth, Mr. Clinton.
A. Well, I'd really like to give you the truth this time... errr... I mean, the truth. I'd like to give it to you, but I'm not sure what you're getting at--not sure what you're asking me.
Q. Let us make this simple for you Mr. Clinton. A Yes or No answer will suffice. The simple question is: Were YOU the individual taking the photographs at Abu Ghraib? You were, in fact, the man behind the camera, Mr. Clinton, were you not?
A. At Abu Ghraib? You think I took the pictures at Abu Ghraib? For crying out loud, I've been in Harlem since April--I haven't been to Iraq in years--what are you talk...
Q. So you HAVE BEEN TO IRAQ, MR. CLINTON! YOU HAVE BEEN, AND YOU WILL BE AGAIN, AND YOU WERE THE INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF U.S. MILITARY PERSONNEL INVOLVED IN TORTURE AT ABU GHRAIB!
A. Jesus -- are ya'll insane? Have ya'll gone completely bonkers? Are you out of your twisted little Congressional minds?
Q. Mr. Clinton, we are asking the questions here today and we have reason to believe that the photos from Abu Ghraib are part of a vast Left Wing conspiracy to bring down the Bush Administration, and we have reason to believe that you and Mrs. Clinton are leading this conspiratorial effort.
A. Why would we want to conspire about what's.....
Q. BECAUSE, MR. CLINTON, YOUR WIFE WANTS OUR GUY'S JOB. We know this, we have reliable intelligence on this, and we would like it, for once in your godforsaken life, if you would TELL US THE TRUTH about this--about something--about ANYTHING! Just say it, Mr. Clinton. JUST SAY IT. SAY "I WAS THE GUY WHO TOOK THE PICTURES AND LEAKED THEM TO 60 MINUTES AND THE LIBERAL MEDIA!!!!" SAY IT!! FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, SAY IT!
A. You know what? I'll tell you the truth. For once in my life I will tell the truth as I sit here before you sorry sacks of shit. You want to know the truth? Here's the truth. While your military machine was raping Iraqi detainees, I WAS taking digital pictures! Does that make you happy? I was using my Sony to shoot some really hot pics with plenty of naked bronze flesh, yah, and plenty of plastic and leashes, even nipple clamps, brothers. I was taking those photos, okay? But guess what--I WASN'T taking them at Abu Ghraib. I was taking them at my office, on the carpet, on my oak desk, on the leather couch. Mmmmm, that's right. Getting into the kink right in my own office. You got it? You understand what was going on there?
Q. Mr. President--Please!
A. You understand you choir boy rapists? You understand? I was having my new assistant Monique pose for me, yes that's right, and she posed for me, brothers, she posed all of it for me, and I took care of her posing for me in ways you war mongering limp dicked sorry excuses for men will never understand. Never. So kiss my Arkansas Ass because I'm outta here. I left this shit behind me four years ago, and I'm leaving it behind now.
Q. Mr. President!
A. You can call me Bill and you can leave me the hell alone. Unless you want some lessons on how to run an economy, and I don't mean into the ground, then I suggest you lose my number.
--end transcript report--
President Clinton's testimony followed that of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who accepted complete responsibility for the misconduct among the guards at Abu Ghraib prison, and offered his apology. "I feel terrible about what happened to these Iraqi detainees," Rumsfeld said. "They're human beings."
Rumsfeld quickly amended his comment, adding, "Well, they're like human beings, except that they're actually desert monkeys."
After excusing Rumsfeld for the day, Congress called former President Bill Clinton to offer testimony on the controversial photos from Abu Ghraib. Mr. Clinton was summoned from his hotel at about 6:00 p.m. by representatives from a bi-partisan commission tasked with uncovering the facts and reporting their findings to the international community. The former Preisdent took the stand shortly after 6:15.
President Clinton faced tough questions from both Democrat and Republican members of Congress during his two-hour testimony. The transcript of the question and answer session follows.
-----begin transcript report-------
Q. Hello President Clinton. Thank you for joining us here today. I hope we haven't inconvenienced you by asking that you appear today.
A. Well, to be honest, I'm not quite sure why I'm here, since I left office four years ago.
Q. President Clinton, what did you know and when did you know it?
A. I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. It really all depends. I mean, I had no idea she was under age if that's what you mea....
Q. No, Mr. Clinton, we're speaking about Abu Ghraib--the torture photos from Abu Ghraib. What did you know and when did you know it?
A. Oh, that! Oh. I see. Well, that question is rather difficult to answer, because I don't have any information from, or any influence within, the current administra....
Q. Mr. Clinton, please answer the question. Certainly you were informed--you have had some role--in this administration's efforts in Iraq. Please tell us what you know about the photos, the soldiers involved in these acts, and the individuals involved in photographing and distributing these pictures. Certainly you are aware of the photographs.
A. Well, I've seen them online, just like the rest of America, and on CNN, but if you're asking whether or not I had any foreknowledge on the photos then I'd have to....
Q. YES, Mr. Clinton. That is what we're asking. What was your role--YOUR ROLE--as far as the photographs and video tapes that have emerged from Abu Ghraib in the last several days.
A. My role?
Q. Yes, you're role.
A. I don't think I had any role in...
Q. No, of course you didn't have any rolls--only digital cameras were involved, Mr. Clinton. Digital cameras do not require rolls of film or photo-processing. Do you understand digital photography, Mr. Clinton?
A. Well, I've taken some photographs of Chelsea with my Sony digital camera, so yes, I know about as much about digital cameras as any American...
Q. As much as any American SOLDIER, Mr. Clinton? Do you know as much about using a digital camera as the typical American S-O-L-D-I-E-R?
A. I really don't understand what's going...
Q. We're asking for the truth, Mr. Clinton.
A. Well, I'd really like to give you the truth this time... errr... I mean, the truth. I'd like to give it to you, but I'm not sure what you're getting at--not sure what you're asking me.
Q. Let us make this simple for you Mr. Clinton. A Yes or No answer will suffice. The simple question is: Were YOU the individual taking the photographs at Abu Ghraib? You were, in fact, the man behind the camera, Mr. Clinton, were you not?
A. At Abu Ghraib? You think I took the pictures at Abu Ghraib? For crying out loud, I've been in Harlem since April--I haven't been to Iraq in years--what are you talk...
Q. So you HAVE BEEN TO IRAQ, MR. CLINTON! YOU HAVE BEEN, AND YOU WILL BE AGAIN, AND YOU WERE THE INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF U.S. MILITARY PERSONNEL INVOLVED IN TORTURE AT ABU GHRAIB!
A. Jesus -- are ya'll insane? Have ya'll gone completely bonkers? Are you out of your twisted little Congressional minds?
Q. Mr. Clinton, we are asking the questions here today and we have reason to believe that the photos from Abu Ghraib are part of a vast Left Wing conspiracy to bring down the Bush Administration, and we have reason to believe that you and Mrs. Clinton are leading this conspiratorial effort.
A. Why would we want to conspire about what's.....
Q. BECAUSE, MR. CLINTON, YOUR WIFE WANTS OUR GUY'S JOB. We know this, we have reliable intelligence on this, and we would like it, for once in your godforsaken life, if you would TELL US THE TRUTH about this--about something--about ANYTHING! Just say it, Mr. Clinton. JUST SAY IT. SAY "I WAS THE GUY WHO TOOK THE PICTURES AND LEAKED THEM TO 60 MINUTES AND THE LIBERAL MEDIA!!!!" SAY IT!! FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, SAY IT!
A. You know what? I'll tell you the truth. For once in my life I will tell the truth as I sit here before you sorry sacks of shit. You want to know the truth? Here's the truth. While your military machine was raping Iraqi detainees, I WAS taking digital pictures! Does that make you happy? I was using my Sony to shoot some really hot pics with plenty of naked bronze flesh, yah, and plenty of plastic and leashes, even nipple clamps, brothers. I was taking those photos, okay? But guess what--I WASN'T taking them at Abu Ghraib. I was taking them at my office, on the carpet, on my oak desk, on the leather couch. Mmmmm, that's right. Getting into the kink right in my own office. You got it? You understand what was going on there?
Q. Mr. President--Please!
A. You understand you choir boy rapists? You understand? I was having my new assistant Monique pose for me, yes that's right, and she posed for me, brothers, she posed all of it for me, and I took care of her posing for me in ways you war mongering limp dicked sorry excuses for men will never understand. Never. So kiss my Arkansas Ass because I'm outta here. I left this shit behind me four years ago, and I'm leaving it behind now.
Q. Mr. President!
A. You can call me Bill and you can leave me the hell alone. Unless you want some lessons on how to run an economy, and I don't mean into the ground, then I suggest you lose my number.
--end transcript report--
May 07, 2004
Meanwhile...
Oh, I'm sorry, but you don't have the oil we want.
"The government of Sudan is responsible for 'ethnic cleansing' and crimes against humanity in Darfur," according to the report, based on a 25-day investigation in and around Darfur. "The Sudanese government and the Arab 'Janjaweed' militias it arms and supports . . . have killed thousands of (ethnic) Fur, Masalit and Zaghawa -- often in cold blood."
It's just tough to be every place at once, isn't it?
In November, don't vote for a President, vote for a superhero.
"The government of Sudan is responsible for 'ethnic cleansing' and crimes against humanity in Darfur," according to the report, based on a 25-day investigation in and around Darfur. "The Sudanese government and the Arab 'Janjaweed' militias it arms and supports . . . have killed thousands of (ethnic) Fur, Masalit and Zaghawa -- often in cold blood."
It's just tough to be every place at once, isn't it?
In November, don't vote for a President, vote for a superhero.
May 06, 2004
ADD, Dissociation, and Other Mental Health Issues: My predictions for the year 2012
By 2012, I predict....
Rather than a disease or illness, ADD in children will become recognized as a coping mechanism for trauma: dissociation. (i.e., attention deficit = dissociation)
ADD Symptoms from the DSM IV
SYMPTOMS OF INATTENTION
a. often ignores details; makes careless mistakes
b. often has trouble sustaining attention in work or play
c. often does not seem to listen when directly addressed
d. often does not follow through on instructions; fails to finish
e. often has difficulty organizing tasks and activities
f. often avoids activities that require a sustained mental effort
g. often loses things he needs
h. often gets distracted by extraneous noise
i. is often forgetful in daily activities
Symptoms of Dissociation in Children
Child goes into a daze or trance-like state at times or often appears "spaced-out." Teachers may report that he or she "daydreams" frequently in school
Child shows rapid changes in personality. He or she may go from being shy to being outgoing, from feminine to masculine, from timid to aggressive.
Child shows marked day-to-day or even hour-to-hour variations in his or her skills, knowledge, food preferences, athletic abilities, e.g. changes in handwriting, memory for previously learned information such as multiplication tables, spelling, use of tools or artistic ability.
Child is unusually forgetful or confused about things that he or she should know..... [[more]]
I predict that ADD will become more readily linked to adverse childhood experiences, and that new whole-family treatment protocols for trauma will be developed and encouraged.
I predict that the early daycare experience (i.e. early separation of the child from the mother) will receive renewed attention in the question of ADD in children.
Yell at me if you want, but sell your Novartis stock by 2008.
I predict that the trauma movement will change how we view psychotropic medications, now filled by the millions to manage the many shades of mental illness in adults and children. Medicines useful? Yes. I predict that multi-pronged treatment approaches--with medicine as only one prong--will become the preferred way to manage depression and mental illness, however.
I predict that the days of the family doc prescribing psych meds are numbered, as liability increases with a failure for medications to manage these illnesses long term.
This has been a public service announcement from someone with no official training in these matters, but 41 years of experience at the University of Hard Knocks.
Rather than a disease or illness, ADD in children will become recognized as a coping mechanism for trauma: dissociation. (i.e., attention deficit = dissociation)
ADD Symptoms from the DSM IV
SYMPTOMS OF INATTENTION
a. often ignores details; makes careless mistakes
b. often has trouble sustaining attention in work or play
c. often does not seem to listen when directly addressed
d. often does not follow through on instructions; fails to finish
e. often has difficulty organizing tasks and activities
f. often avoids activities that require a sustained mental effort
g. often loses things he needs
h. often gets distracted by extraneous noise
i. is often forgetful in daily activities
Symptoms of Dissociation in Children
Child goes into a daze or trance-like state at times or often appears "spaced-out." Teachers may report that he or she "daydreams" frequently in school
Child shows rapid changes in personality. He or she may go from being shy to being outgoing, from feminine to masculine, from timid to aggressive.
Child shows marked day-to-day or even hour-to-hour variations in his or her skills, knowledge, food preferences, athletic abilities, e.g. changes in handwriting, memory for previously learned information such as multiplication tables, spelling, use of tools or artistic ability.
Child is unusually forgetful or confused about things that he or she should know..... [[more]]
I predict that ADD will become more readily linked to adverse childhood experiences, and that new whole-family treatment protocols for trauma will be developed and encouraged.
I predict that the early daycare experience (i.e. early separation of the child from the mother) will receive renewed attention in the question of ADD in children.
Yell at me if you want, but sell your Novartis stock by 2008.
I predict that the trauma movement will change how we view psychotropic medications, now filled by the millions to manage the many shades of mental illness in adults and children. Medicines useful? Yes. I predict that multi-pronged treatment approaches--with medicine as only one prong--will become the preferred way to manage depression and mental illness, however.
I predict that the days of the family doc prescribing psych meds are numbered, as liability increases with a failure for medications to manage these illnesses long term.
This has been a public service announcement from someone with no official training in these matters, but 41 years of experience at the University of Hard Knocks.
May 05, 2004
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Preident Requests $25 Billion More for Mid-East War Effort
Six Hundred rectal pears, Nine Hundred Chain Flails, Three Breast Rippers, Two Racks, and One St. Elmo's Belt Are Among Special Ops' Equipment Slotted for Funding.
Blog Calvinism
Found this over here after stopping by for donuts over here, and got to thinking how much this take on academic calvinism reminds me of the blog world. There would not be, as once upon a time there was not, a weblog elect class if not for the misplaced idolitry of weblog believers.
Do you too see an a-list parallel in the following?
Calvinist beliefs in predestination led believers to distinguish between the elect and the preterite - those who were destined to go to heaven, and those who were destined to go to hell. Because it was impossible to be sure whether they were going to ascend to paradise or to burn, Calvinists sought evidence that they were favoured by God through accumulating goods without consuming them. If you did well in worldly affairs, you could take this as a sign of God’s favour.
Translation Key
Elect = Self-identified (or at least non-protesting) A-Listers
Preterite = The rest
Heaven = More than 1,500 hits per day
Hell = Fewer than 50 hits per day
Goods = Links, search engine results, mentions in mainstream articles about blogging
Without consuming them = without linking to "the rest."
God = Technorati, google, dave winer
Wordly Affairs = Book contract or academic fellowship
The Calvinist illusion is that luck has nothing to do with it - markets reward virtue. Success in selling your wares is the only necessary proof of one’s innate superiority.
Do you too see an a-list parallel in the following?
Calvinist beliefs in predestination led believers to distinguish between the elect and the preterite - those who were destined to go to heaven, and those who were destined to go to hell. Because it was impossible to be sure whether they were going to ascend to paradise or to burn, Calvinists sought evidence that they were favoured by God through accumulating goods without consuming them. If you did well in worldly affairs, you could take this as a sign of God’s favour.
Translation Key
Elect = Self-identified (or at least non-protesting) A-Listers
Preterite = The rest
Heaven = More than 1,500 hits per day
Hell = Fewer than 50 hits per day
Goods = Links, search engine results, mentions in mainstream articles about blogging
Without consuming them = without linking to "the rest."
God = Technorati, google, dave winer
Wordly Affairs = Book contract or academic fellowship
The Calvinist illusion is that luck has nothing to do with it - markets reward virtue. Success in selling your wares is the only necessary proof of one’s innate superiority.
for those who were absent last year, part deux
Jeneane on seeing. And on blogs and velocity, and more meta blogging.
For a recent good read on one man's meta, check out Jay Rosen's Q&A post on PressThink.
For a recent good read on one man's meta, check out Jay Rosen's Q&A post on PressThink.
for those who were absent last year...
Jeneane on the corporate blog.
Also here, and here.
Please, please, if a single executive is left among my readers, READ THIS from ME:
DO NOT blog as your business card title.
Do not blog as a CEO. First, last, and always, Blog as a father, blog as a mother, blog as a lover, blog as a gardener, a kick boxer, a trail walker, a brother, a sister, a pianist, a lover of literature, an auto freak, a war monger, a peace lover, a door hanger, a little league coach, a cross-dresser, a rock-n-roll fanatic, a gadget lover, a cancer survivor, a computer nerd, an antique train collector, a griever, a lover of striped ties or fancy underwear--whatever. Blog from your gut, your places of passion, blog about what brings you joy, what socks you in the middle and knocks the wind out of you, but for pete's sake, don't blog from your BUSINESS CARD TITLE!!!
Also here, and here.
Please, please, if a single executive is left among my readers, READ THIS from ME:
DO NOT blog as your business card title.
Do not blog as a CEO. First, last, and always, Blog as a father, blog as a mother, blog as a lover, blog as a gardener, a kick boxer, a trail walker, a brother, a sister, a pianist, a lover of literature, an auto freak, a war monger, a peace lover, a door hanger, a little league coach, a cross-dresser, a rock-n-roll fanatic, a gadget lover, a cancer survivor, a computer nerd, an antique train collector, a griever, a lover of striped ties or fancy underwear--whatever. Blog from your gut, your places of passion, blog about what brings you joy, what socks you in the middle and knocks the wind out of you, but for pete's sake, don't blog from your BUSINESS CARD TITLE!!!
May 03, 2004
May 02, 2004
carly and jeff
not spam--hey guys, new laptop & i lost yer email addresses and can't find the number. can you email us this week w/ your number? we're still scrimping and scraping to try to meet you to meet you in jamaica in june... Likelihood at 40%. need carly's deep discount dealing skills... talk to ya soon!
April 27, 2004
Chris Rock On
Morning laugh: The Number One Reason.
Don't even think about it---is he ever work safe?
From Unfogged.
Don't even think about it---is he ever work safe?
From Unfogged.
US Troops to Remain in Iraq through Armageddon
From the 4/26 Press Briefing
Q Scott, last week there were some reports at the end of the week about sovereignty in Iraq not being full sovereignty. Is that true, or -- what gradations are there of sovereignty that --
MR. McCLELLAN: Look, at the end of June the coalition will be transferring sovereignty to the Iraqi people. Obviously, in terms of security, there is still a need for coalition forces to work with Iraqis to improve the security situation. And they will continue to -- the coalition forces will remain in Iraq for some time after the transfer of sovereignty. But this is -- at the end of June, the Coalition Provisional Authority will cease to exist, and sovereignty will be transferred to an interim, representative body. That is what Mr. Brahimi has been working to address. He will be coming back in May with some more specifics to that interim body, and they will serve in that interim period before elections are held, under the schedule laid out in the transitional administrative law.
Q So that's full sovereignty transferred, though.
MR. McCLELLAN: I would describe it as, sovereignty will be transferred to the Iraqi people. In terms of security, coalition forces will continue to -- they will remain in Iraq to continue to provide for the security alongside of Iraqi security forces. The Iraqi people want coalition forces to remain until they realize a free and peaceful future. And we will -- we will remain in Iraq to help with the security situation.
On whether or not FOX NEWS is the President's personal mouthpiece:
Q. I don't know if you saw, before we got on the plane, John Kerry was on Good Morning America answering to some charges as to some --
MR. McCLELLAN: One of your all's network.
Q. -- there you go...
Q Scott, last week there were some reports at the end of the week about sovereignty in Iraq not being full sovereignty. Is that true, or -- what gradations are there of sovereignty that --
MR. McCLELLAN: Look, at the end of June the coalition will be transferring sovereignty to the Iraqi people. Obviously, in terms of security, there is still a need for coalition forces to work with Iraqis to improve the security situation. And they will continue to -- the coalition forces will remain in Iraq for some time after the transfer of sovereignty. But this is -- at the end of June, the Coalition Provisional Authority will cease to exist, and sovereignty will be transferred to an interim, representative body. That is what Mr. Brahimi has been working to address. He will be coming back in May with some more specifics to that interim body, and they will serve in that interim period before elections are held, under the schedule laid out in the transitional administrative law.
Q So that's full sovereignty transferred, though.
MR. McCLELLAN: I would describe it as, sovereignty will be transferred to the Iraqi people. In terms of security, coalition forces will continue to -- they will remain in Iraq to continue to provide for the security alongside of Iraqi security forces. The Iraqi people want coalition forces to remain until they realize a free and peaceful future. And we will -- we will remain in Iraq to help with the security situation.
On whether or not FOX NEWS is the President's personal mouthpiece:
Q. I don't know if you saw, before we got on the plane, John Kerry was on Good Morning America answering to some charges as to some --
MR. McCLELLAN: One of your all's network.
Q. -- there you go...
The Passion of The Bush
Bush on Jesus:
"I asked him where he was raised. He said, Southern California," commented the President before his remarks. "He said he didn't speak English when he came to America at age five. His dad had big dreams for him. And here he is, years later, introducing the President of the United States in perfect English.
"I asked him where he was raised. He said, Southern California," commented the President before his remarks. "He said he didn't speak English when he came to America at age five. His dad had big dreams for him. And here he is, years later, introducing the President of the United States in perfect English.
April 26, 2004
A parent home with sick kids always gets a nod from me
Andrew's been doing a run of nose wiping.
I am happily looking forward to a long day of two fragile, croaky, wheezy, sniffling, coughing children; both attempting to monopolise the one couch and one television. They cannot coexist peacefully at the best of times: how will they be today.
He's also looking for work, and knows Data Warehousing like a labrador knows pond water. Send a care package, in the form of Puffs Plus and a job, to Andrew in Australia.
I am happily looking forward to a long day of two fragile, croaky, wheezy, sniffling, coughing children; both attempting to monopolise the one couch and one television. They cannot coexist peacefully at the best of times: how will they be today.
He's also looking for work, and knows Data Warehousing like a labrador knows pond water. Send a care package, in the form of Puffs Plus and a job, to Andrew in Australia.
April 25, 2004
My Blog Is a Casetas Telefonicas
I came here tonight to talk about my falling out with blogging, and as I struggled to put words as to why I'm not attracted to this medium right now, the word "boring" was the one I was going to use. Before I went over to read Tom, I was searching up images on google, thinking about piecing together a poster that summarized my ennui, some kind of Blogging Is a Bore poster with an ole hound asleep on a shady porch. That was just one image I was looking for. Because Blogging has become that predictable.
So, in my travels I hop over to see if Tom is still Mexicaning, and to my surprise and joy, I see he is defending my honor over there. I smile. I post my thoughts (below). Then I go back to read what else Tom's been up to.
What I find is this Gem, which, if I were to take it and run with it, which I don't think Tom would mind, I would extrapolate that he is precisely right, not only within American culture as Walmartitis reflects our obsession with the shallow order of things, but also, he is double right in that this very same element is what is BORING ME TO DEATH right now as a weblogger.
There is something to be said for blurring the lines between potatoes and tampons, between phone cards and baking soda.
There is something profound in the brushing up of one against the next.
There is something precious in searching among the unlike.
There is joy in the finding.
Much of that joy is what we once had here in blogland. It's gone missing, for me anyway. Maybe it's behind the Ketchup, just to the right of the motor oil.
I can conjure an image of the place Tom writes about--the casetas telefonicas--if only sort of, because here in the U.S. you can walk into the rare family-owned deli that isn't trying to be Walmart and enjoy the blurring of edges around the meaning and classifying of things.
Tom describes it here: Anyone who has been in a Mexican market knows how their spaces exhibit horror vacui. This sort of aggregating would have a harder time occuring in the U.S., where the borders between kinds of businesses, types of property, and modes of economic activity are more sharply etched in our imaginings of propriety and order.
My dad owned a little Deli. A couple, actually. I think I never said that here. And so, the this-and-that of the Mexican Phone Store tickled me, Tom.
I can say with pride now, then, that my blog is not about journalism or PR or marketing or writing or business. I want my blog to be a Mexican Phone Store and I want to hang out at other blogs that are casetas telefonicas that don't sell phones at all.
What's that in middle isle? Could be meat, could be cake.
You taste it and you tell me.
I'll be back for more on this when Tom takes his post further.
So, in my travels I hop over to see if Tom is still Mexicaning, and to my surprise and joy, I see he is defending my honor over there. I smile. I post my thoughts (below). Then I go back to read what else Tom's been up to.
What I find is this Gem, which, if I were to take it and run with it, which I don't think Tom would mind, I would extrapolate that he is precisely right, not only within American culture as Walmartitis reflects our obsession with the shallow order of things, but also, he is double right in that this very same element is what is BORING ME TO DEATH right now as a weblogger.
There is something to be said for blurring the lines between potatoes and tampons, between phone cards and baking soda.
There is something profound in the brushing up of one against the next.
There is something precious in searching among the unlike.
There is joy in the finding.
Much of that joy is what we once had here in blogland. It's gone missing, for me anyway. Maybe it's behind the Ketchup, just to the right of the motor oil.
I can conjure an image of the place Tom writes about--the casetas telefonicas--if only sort of, because here in the U.S. you can walk into the rare family-owned deli that isn't trying to be Walmart and enjoy the blurring of edges around the meaning and classifying of things.
Tom describes it here: Anyone who has been in a Mexican market knows how their spaces exhibit horror vacui. This sort of aggregating would have a harder time occuring in the U.S., where the borders between kinds of businesses, types of property, and modes of economic activity are more sharply etched in our imaginings of propriety and order.
My dad owned a little Deli. A couple, actually. I think I never said that here. And so, the this-and-that of the Mexican Phone Store tickled me, Tom.
I can say with pride now, then, that my blog is not about journalism or PR or marketing or writing or business. I want my blog to be a Mexican Phone Store and I want to hang out at other blogs that are casetas telefonicas that don't sell phones at all.
What's that in middle isle? Could be meat, could be cake.
You taste it and you tell me.
I'll be back for more on this when Tom takes his post further.
You Came to the Comments Party But You Didn't Go Home and Talk About It.
Thank you, Tom. Thank you for pointing out something that has been bugging me. Not a lot bugging me. But a little bugging me.
You need only read the far-ranging pre-bloggercon comment discussions over at Jay's post on Journalism v blogging to see what Tom means.
Although I offered some fairly insightful nuggets, as did Weldon and many others, including Tom, when Jay summarized the observations of fellow bloggers in his posts that followed, Weldon and I and a few others fell off the map.
In Jay's summary of the thread, Weldon and I didn't make the cut, and in the next pre-bloggercon piece, Jay links to a host of folks talking about the theme, including the whole parade of usual suspects, and some unusual suspects thank God, but doesn't pull out many of those pieces of his 120-something comments that, as a matter of fact, I think he should have. That action could have furthered the discussion (rather than widening the discussion out along a familiar path of either 1) conference attendees or 2) bloggers who cover this stuff anyway).
Furthering and widening or broadening are two different things.
Jay suggested I take my comments to my blog because he felt they were worth exploring. I like Jay and I trust that if I had, and if Weldon had, then Jay probably would have linked to some of the rather astute observations we'd made. At the time, though, I didn't want to. I didn't think it served the thread well in the middle of what had turned into a sort of "think tank" to do the blogging-as-usual bullshitty deal of running off to my own separate blog to pontificate about what I had just said at our little gathering. Isn't it enough that I said it at Jay's house? Do I have to come home and say it over here too?
Why do we have comments if we aren't going to weigh what is said in comments within the larger discussion or theme? Yes, comments are different from posts, but they're also the best place to STOP hearing the sound of our own voices and in some cases to join a more tightly-joined discussion with others--some who blog and some who don't. And why isn't that gathering in and of itself sometimes enough? And if not, why do I bother commenting? Sometimes I don't blog over here for a few days because I'm participating in other blogs within comments. I consider that as important as posting.
Are we gathering gathering in comments just so that we can run back to our own houses and tell how badly the cocktail weenies sucked or how hot the host looked or what great music they played or how I don't agree with their politics?
Man, I hope not.
You need only read the far-ranging pre-bloggercon comment discussions over at Jay's post on Journalism v blogging to see what Tom means.
Although I offered some fairly insightful nuggets, as did Weldon and many others, including Tom, when Jay summarized the observations of fellow bloggers in his posts that followed, Weldon and I and a few others fell off the map.
In Jay's summary of the thread, Weldon and I didn't make the cut, and in the next pre-bloggercon piece, Jay links to a host of folks talking about the theme, including the whole parade of usual suspects, and some unusual suspects thank God, but doesn't pull out many of those pieces of his 120-something comments that, as a matter of fact, I think he should have. That action could have furthered the discussion (rather than widening the discussion out along a familiar path of either 1) conference attendees or 2) bloggers who cover this stuff anyway).
Furthering and widening or broadening are two different things.
Jay suggested I take my comments to my blog because he felt they were worth exploring. I like Jay and I trust that if I had, and if Weldon had, then Jay probably would have linked to some of the rather astute observations we'd made. At the time, though, I didn't want to. I didn't think it served the thread well in the middle of what had turned into a sort of "think tank" to do the blogging-as-usual bullshitty deal of running off to my own separate blog to pontificate about what I had just said at our little gathering. Isn't it enough that I said it at Jay's house? Do I have to come home and say it over here too?
Why do we have comments if we aren't going to weigh what is said in comments within the larger discussion or theme? Yes, comments are different from posts, but they're also the best place to STOP hearing the sound of our own voices and in some cases to join a more tightly-joined discussion with others--some who blog and some who don't. And why isn't that gathering in and of itself sometimes enough? And if not, why do I bother commenting? Sometimes I don't blog over here for a few days because I'm participating in other blogs within comments. I consider that as important as posting.
Are we gathering gathering in comments just so that we can run back to our own houses and tell how badly the cocktail weenies sucked or how hot the host looked or what great music they played or how I don't agree with their politics?
Man, I hope not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)