February 28, 2009
CPAC’s conservative blog of the year is written by a guy living on the upper west side of Manhattan. And, I don’t know him…how?
February 27, 2009
Does Obama’s real need to state how clear he’s trying to be in nearly every single speech grating on anyone else’s nerves yet? Especially when he’s usually not clear at all?
“Let me be clear: there is no military solution in Iraq, and there never was. The best way to protect our security and to pressure Iraq’s leaders to resolve their civil war is to immediately begin to remove our combat troops. Not in six months or one year – now.”- September 12, 2007 remarks
“But I also want to be very clear about what this plan will not do: It will not rescue the unscrupulous or irresponsible by throwing good taxpayer money after bad loans.”-Housing plan speech
“Now, let me be clear — let me be absolutely clear, because I know you’ll end up hearing some of the same claims that rolling back these tax breaks means a massive tax increase on the American people”-Feb. 24 Speech To A Joint Session Of Congress
“Let me be clear: America is committed to Israel’s security. And we will always support Israel’s right to defend itself against legitimate threats.”-January 22, 2009 Remarks to State Department Employees.
“Let me be clear: ending this war is not going to be easy. There will be dangers involved.”-A March 19, 2008 speech in Fayetteville, NC.
“Now let me be clear — I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power.”-Oct. 2, 2002 speech where Obama called the Iraq war “a dumb war … a rash war.”
“And let me be clear: Our goal is not to further burden an already struggling industry; it is to help America’s automakers prepare for the future.”-January 26th, 2009 climate speech.
“Now, let me be clear. Let me be clear. We have real enemies in the world. These enemies must be found. They must be pursued. And they must be defeated.”-2004 speech at the DNC convention.
And so I want to be very clear: We sent our troops to Iraq to do away with Saddam Hussein’s regime – and you got the job done. We kept our troops in Iraq to help establish a sovereign government – and you got the job done.
-Barack Obama in a speech to US troops.
I’ve been meaning to blog about Shahar Peer, the female tennis player from Israel who was denied entry to Dubai for a tournament, for awhile now. Jewcy sums up:
The turnaround comes too late for Ram’s fellow Israeli, Shahar Peer, who was refused a visa on the grounds that her participation might provoke “fan anger” in the wake of Israel’s recent war with Hamas in Gaza. The women’s competition is already underway and Peer is absent – not because her performance isn’t up to scratch, but because of her Israeli passport. Ram’s exemption from the ban appears to be the result of external pressure – in protest at the Peer decision, the Tennis Channel in the US said it wouldn’t broadcast the event, while the Wall Street Journal European edition pulled its sponsorship – and not any soul-searching on the part of the UAE’s rulers. The emirate’s terse statement announcing that Ram would, after all, be allowed in, didn’t provide a reason as to why and studiously avoided any mention of the words “Israel” or “Israeli.”
Thanks to this rather undignified violation of fundamental sporting ethics, Dubai’s self-image has taken something of a battering. Dubai likes to present itself as an exception in the Arab world; Ibiza, if you will, set to a Middle Eastern rhythm, with all the attendant wealth and glamor and sun-drenched hedonism. The migrant workers who built its shimmering facade, most of them drawn from South Asian countries and living in wretched conditions, have long known the sordid truth. Yet it took the exclusion of an Israeli celebrity to achieve something that the daily trials of thousands of nameless Bangladeshi laborers could never do: persuade the world to look at Dubai a little more cynically. As the Wall Street Journal acidly observed, “a city-state that fancies itself a global mecca for commerce, sport and recreation ought to be able to handle a few Jews in its cosmopolitan midst.” Yes, and they might want to tackle these constant reports about slavery as well.
February 26, 2009
Some experts are quick to point out that it is not only parents who may contribute to children’s food anxieties. They cite nutritional programs in schools that may go overboard. “I see younger kids who have an eating disorder precipitated by a nutrition lesson in school,” said Dr. Leslie Sanders, medical director of the eating disorders program at Atlantic Health Overlook Hospital in Summit, New Jersey.
Over the last five years, Sanders said, she has seen a rise in the number of children who are fixated on the way they eat: “Some educators categorize food into ‘good’ and ‘bad.’ The kids come home and say ‘Don’t eat French fries’ instead of talking about moderation.”
The problem, according to some nutritional experts, is that many teachers don’t understand nutrition well. “We’re driving our kids absolutely crazy,” said Katie Wilson, president of the School Nutrition Association. “All the stuff about preservatives and pesticides. All an 8-year-old kid should know is that he or she should eat a variety of colors, and don’t supersize anything but your water jug.”
The parents aren’t blameless though, and not just because they name their kid Greye.
Funny and on-point, that’s how I like my articles:
A lot of optimistic people bought houses near the historic height of the market, say November 2005, for absurdly high prices, say $1.12 million, in places like the eastern Hollywood Hills section of Los Angeles. These people are very, very sad. Trust me on this. But the sudden drop in housing prices hasn’t made it any harder for these people to pay their loans. That’s because your home’s value is utterly irrelevant until you want to sell it — the same as your baseball cards, Hummel figurines or casual encounters. (See pictures of Americans in their homes.)
The only people affected by plummeting real estate prices are the ones who bought a house that cost more than they could afford, hoping for a spike in value so they could sell at a profit or take out a new loan based on an increased value. Their home wasn’t just a place to live; it was an investment they thought they could liquefy at will. If we’re saving these poor souls from the 26.7% drop in their investment, we should give twice as much aid to everyone who has lost approximately 50% in the stock market since its peak. Especially those in Vanguard’s Tax-Managed Capital Appreciation Fund.
“Frank was one of them. Frank! Moose was another one of them. Moose. I said, ‘Well, what if the dog isn’t a moose’”
FIRST LADY MICHELLE OBAMA, on how she doesn’t like her daughters’ list of possible names for a dog
February 25, 2009
Why not Mark Sanford in ‘12? In the same vein, why wasn’t Mark Sanford an option in ‘08?
What I love most about Facebook is the way it puts people you like, but might not actually get to see, front and center in your life. And it tells you all kinds of things about them without ever having to actually make contact with them.
Today my thinking went: “oooh, look at Max Gross commenting on Robert George’s status. Max is so cool, I love our funny conversations at poker games and parties. He even checked up on me when I was sick. Man, that Max Gross should have a blog, I would totally read him! Oh, wait, does he blog on his Schlub to Stud site? I think he did. Does he still? Oh, he does! He does! I should blogroll him so I remember to read him all the time.”
And now I have. Thank you, Facebook!
I have to disagree with Ace and Allah, a rare happening, I think Bobby Jindal did a great job in his rebuttal. Wooden? Um, our last candidate was John McCain and our last Republican president was George W. Bush. Jindal? I’ll take it. The real issue with Jindal is the same issue we had with Palin: they’re not ready for the kind of scrutiny they will get on the national stage. Both are great leaders, both are very bright, and both will be eaten alive if they don’t take some time to adjust to the spotlight. Can we run in ‘12? Maybe. I’d rather he wait until ‘16, personally, and we run a Mark Sanford-type instead. But good job in the response, Bobby. Straightforward, honest, plain-spoken and clear. That’s all we really needed right now.
February 24, 2009
…but I feel guilty that I didn’t blog all day so:
While shopping I deviate wildly between “wow, this stuff is practically free!!!” and “what the hell are these prices, do they not know there is a recession???”
February 23, 2009
New York Young Republican Club (the independent one, obviously) disses Bloomberg:
Last night, the president of the New York Young Republican Club, Daniel Peterson, sent a letter to the five Republican Party chairmen for each of the NYC boroughs asserting that the NYC GOP should not endorse Mayor Michael Bloomberg for a third term nor permit him to run on the Republican Party line.
The organization argues that Mayor Bloomberg has not demonstrated a sufficient commitment to urban Republican principles, such as fiscal responsibility and personal liberty, and has impeded the growth of the party city-wide after pledging to encourage it. According to Peterson, Republican support for Bloomberg has not aided the party’s development in the past, and continued support would send the message that the Republican Party cares more about a candidate’s checkbook than his conservative credentials.
Don’t you know you have to conform?
From this week’s Post Secret: