2. Can I just say, once again: Congress, Do Something!!!!! The house should have voted on the GD bill today! WTF???
3. Okay, partial credit: Hilda Solis will most likely be confirmed as Labory Secty tomorrow.
4. If you don't say 'Awwwww', your heart may be two sizes too small:
5. That is so his real hair!
6. What movie should I see this weekend: "Frozen River", "Frost/Nixon", or...?
175 comments:
So, let me get this straight: if someone doesn't agree with you and/or your messiah, that person is a douche? I thought people in this country were allowed to have differing opinions. At least they were when a Republican was in the White House. That's so NOT politically correct anymore, is it?
Just checking.
And still "Watching".
Your juvenile name-calling is getting quite old, FYI.
see Frost/Nixon and then let me know how it was!
That baby monkey looks a lot like my little niece. I think I'll send her the photo.
I'm up late because I can't sleep and work is stressing me OUT.
:)
Yikes! My eyes! That is one ugly baby.
No offense, Suza, but I hope that niece of yours favors her father's side...
Watching - no, it's not because he doesn't agree with Obama. It's because he knew he didn't agree when he accepted the nomination. It's because he knew he didn't agree when he put the people of New Hampshire through all of that rigamarole about his replacement. I said then that he was putting party ahead of his country, and he proved me right yesterday. By doing what he did, withdrawing like that, all he did was embarrass himself and the President - that is douchery at it's finest.
The President is not my messiah. He wasn't my candidate in the primaries, but he's who won. Get used to it!
People were allowed to have differing opinions when GWB was President?!?!!? Having my patriotism questioned because I was against the illegal war and occupation of Iraq was PC?
I can see why you chose 'watching' as your screen name - 'thinking' certainly wouldn't have been appropriate. If you don't like it here, you are certainly welcome to go elsewhere. My feelings won't be hurt.
I guess Republicans haven't yet figured out that 'douche' in reference to them is complimentary.
I think any leader wants those who are working in his administration to be idealistically on the same page as him. 100% on the same page, or as close as possible thereto. Republicans and Democrats CAN work together for a common goal in many situations. But if Judd Gregg knew early on that he couldn't be a cheerleader for the President's "Grand Plan to Fix the World", then isn't it better that he leave now, so that someone who could be appropriately supportive can have the job?
It seems clear to me that Obama is trying SO HARD to get a few Repubs into the mix so that if (when) the excrement hits the fan, he can say it wasn't entirely a democratic fuck-up.
Oh, and I'm more than "used" to the fact that there's a democrat in the White House. Unlike some of the stereotypical right wingers out there, I'm much more middle-of-the-road, almost liberal, in my views. I just like to keep the money I work way too hard to earn, not give it away to others who do nothing to deserve it, other than breathe through their mouths.
Hmmm...look at that - I was somehow able to string a few semi-coherant thoughts together. Guess I can think afterall. Your insults don't bother me - they are typical of how one acts when she has nothing of real substance to say, or at least when she wonders whether she does or not.
Yep, still "Watching".
maybe you should go see "He's just not that into you." It's amusing.
Tell me, what has changed since Gregg accepted the nomination? Not his philosophy, not the President's. So, why accept one week and decline the next.
Yes, for the two years since he announced his candidacy, proclaiming that he would be as bi-partisan as possible, President Obama has been plotting a way to blame the Republicans for everything that goes wrong...even before the depression, he made sure he'd have a way to stick it to them. You are a genius, to see through his evil plot. Thank goodness you're on our side...
Again, if what I write is so unsubstantial, why are you even here? You say you're middle-of-the-road, but you smell kind of tool-y to me...just sayin'.
"idealistically on the same page"
Yeah, you're a real deep thinker, Watch. Your description of your own ideology says it all. You're almost liberal, but you can't quite get there because you hate people less fortunate than you. Sterling.
Hilda Solis! Que buena. My lord, compare her to her predecessor, Ms. Chao. New day dawnin in the Labor Dept. Now the NLRB needs some attention.
I think Obama sought republican participation in his government to put him in a position to persuade republicans in congress to support, or at least to compromise, on important financial legislation. Personally, I don't think it's going to work that way. I think the repubs will try to find a way to do what they did with Newt the Brute. Might as well join the fight now.
'work way too hard to earn'... let me guess-- endless nights poring over which fund will best deliver money for nothing; shopping only at Wal Mart to take advantage of all the great sweatshop bargains... I'm sure the list of toils goes on and on and on, much like Republican knuckledraggers when their incoherent grunts fail to engage the first thousand times they're recycled.
You have some interesting stereotypes of Republicans, TooSense.
This wv is not for real...bedem? I swear I'm not making this up!
"House Approves Stimulus With No Republican Support"
NYT news flash just now.
War's on.
I just took a quick look at the NLRB website. It appears that three (of five total) seats have been empty since 2007. I'm gonna have to look into how the Dems manouevered to keep Bush-Cheney from packing the board before leaving town. (Think the board has been a bit moribund in the meantime?)
xootie - all this labor talk is getting me hot! Keep us posted...
I must say, I'm a little disappointed that there hasn't been one comment on Joe's rockin' pony tail.
Jeez, My former husband and 19 year-old son both have ponytails. They're conservative politically.
xootsuit said: "Your description of your own ideology says it all. You're almost liberal, but you can't quite get there because you hate people less fortunate than you. Sterling."
Less fortunate? Have you ever been to the welfare office? There are generations of people in this country who are too lazy to drag their asses out of bed and who are more than happy to take the multitude of handouts that we're stupid enough to give them, under the guise of their "misfortune". If they aren't committing faud in order to obtain their free handouts, these are the same people who commit serious crimes and then live in jails and prisons, also paid for by the taxes I shell out. And if they aren't busy popping out kid after kid (garnering more aid paid for by ME), some of them even undergo optional procedures such as in vitro fertilization, and have their gazillions of childrens' medical care paid for, again, by ME. But guess what? They can have all of the abortions they want, and I'll happily help fund those.
Pardon me if I think I shouldn't have to foot the bill for certain peoples' lifestyle choices, under the fallacy that they NEED assistance. I could make much better decisions on where my money should go than a bunch of politicians, if I were afforded the opportunity. Unlike many prominent Democrats, I actually pay my taxes.
And no, I spend neither my work day nor my spare time poring over any "funds". Not every Republican is independently wealthy. Shockingly, many of us are just "comfortable". Trust that I see the welfare system in action every single day. I know of what I speak.
-Still "Watching" this train wreck.
Watch, originally you described the hordes of free-loaders you hate as mouth breathers -- and you offered no other explanation for your hate. (You wrote: "I just like to keep the money I work way too hard to earn, not give it away to others who do nothing to deserve it, other than breathe through their mouths.")
Now you claim you've chronicled "generations" of these despicable lazy people leaching through the welfare system. And how you also toss in crime. Sounds like you're talking about the urban poor -- the folks from the ghettos and barrios who don't earn decent pay. Is that right?
If so, then any liberal who wanted to could demonstrate that lack of education and opportunity contribute mightily to the problems those poor people deal with on a daily basis. If you really think you're not more fortunate than they are then I guess I have to rethink my opinion about nastiness being the defining element of your character.
PcReece AKA Shrill Watching, is a ridiculous and sniveliong hypocrite. He bashes unions although he is a member of one. Bashes the state government while claiming to work for it. He is under the delusion that he is a self-made man and self-reliant although taxpayers pay his salary and the unions help the working/middle class.
Hey Goober. This is an early wedding gift. Just remember we're not friends...I just like weddings...even between people I dislike.
http://ineedashotofredemption.blogspot.com/
gina - I wanted to leave a comment, where's the button?
It's an art gallery, no talking allowed. Period. That's what your blog is for.
Even art galleries let you talk...
.
Well, I'll post my silliness here, then.
.
"Gee, Gina. Now when they go on their honeymoon, Mr. & Mrs. Suza will have to be sure and say 'So long, Gina, and thanks for all the fish'!"
.
Of course, no one will get it unless they go to your blog, so everybody go check out gina's blog! (You try to be such a hard ass, but that was a very sweet post, gina.)
I'm not a hard ass at all. In fact, I've been told I have a very nice, shapely ass.
That entry was riddled with all sorts of hidden meanings, you know.
And, if people are yapping they're not seeing and thinking. Think of it as a going to a lecture or a concert. Silencio!!
'would you have my baby' isn't exactly subtle...
Oh. Thanks for the heads up, YC. No point in wasting much blog space on that guy.
oh yeah, I remember PC - he's an airline pilot or something, right?
I work hard for my money too, but that doesn't mean that I'm not compassionate in the way that I want to see it spent.
In other words, less Haliborton, more social programs that WORK.
Let's not forget that it was Gregg who went to the President; Gregg ASKED for & campaigned for the job of Commerce Sec'ty... so I'd have to agree it was douchey to back out the way he did.
And Joe's ponytail? Ugh! No thanks.
Debbo - I thought you'd like the pony tail, it's an Onion special!
Well, any opinions on the Justice Department and wire tapping? Isn't anyone feeling betrayed by yet another about face from Obama?
My somewhat overzealous reaction to Sarah Palin last year caught the attention of my republican friends and colleagues. Oh, he's a liberal, they realized. (Little do they know.)
Now I get a regular feed of videos trashing Obama for his about-faces. Well, he's also made important changes he promised to make. If he hits .500, he'll make the Hall. IMO.
Michael - missed you! Happy Valentine's Day!
As I said all along, President Obama is just another politician. Expediency is the name of the game, and as was shown this past summer with the Supremes decision regarding the 2nd Amendment, he does seem to be a law & order type. I think I'm with xootie on this one, as long as there are more marks in the 'plus' column (as I define it) at the end of his term(s), he'll go down a winner in my book.
It's early days still (not even a month), so I'm holding back on judging him quite yet...
"Well, he's also made important changes he promised to make." If this was legislation we were talking about, I'd agree. Look, my reticence about Obama was not like that of your conservative friends. I agree with nearly all of his positions, it was his sincerity I doubted. On two of the most important issues of our time, he's abandoned his vociferous opposition to Bush policy. First it was appointing deregulators to head his economic team, now it's upholding the right of the government to spy on it's citizens and private business to assist the government in the task. These are not positions he was forced to adopt, he could act as he chose.... He lied, big time.
Michael. Vociferous?!?! It's difficult to argue with an individual who uses a word like that. But I have issues with you saying Obama lied. How did he lie? You state "First it was appointing deregulators to head his economic team, now it's upholding the right of the government to spy on it's citizens and private business to assist the government in the task. These are not positions he was forced to adopt, he could act as he chose.... He lied, big time."
Uhm...you don't like this. Granted. Okay
Where's the lie?
At what point did Obama say he would or would not do these things?
You not like? Okay.
But, where's the lie?
How has this made him a liar?
Sorry to be a buttinsky, am I hearing correctly? That Obama is not changing anything regarding governmental spying on citizens?
That is so funny. That was one of the biggest gripes coming from the left when they attacked Bush.
Sorry I'm so uninformed these days, I've pretty much conceded that Socialism is here to stay until people wise-up and smell the coffee and decide that they don't like it, or it fails, whichever comes first.
I won't be too quick to assume that failure to follow through means he "lied" originally. Some campaign promises make sense when they're said and turn senseless when the time comes to fulfill them.
The plunge in the economy during the campaign both sealed Obama's election and ensured that he would have huge trouble to deal with when he took over. I don't know why he chose some people, but I have no reason to believe that he did it for any other reason than to get things done, as quickly as possible.
Overall, Obama seems to have acted boldly where he could and more carefully, conservatively, where he had to. So far he's doing more or less what I hoped he would do when I voted for him.
Xoot, it seems that what you are saying, in part, is that Obama found out ( after he was elected) that the Bush policy on warrantless wire tapping was the correct position. That he got a reality check. That would lend a great deal of credence to the idea that he was not experienced enough to be ready "day one"... on this economic mess, I was always extremely leery of where he was coming from due to the great pains he took to insure that the money he took from Wall Street came from unregisterd lobbyists. When he chose Summers and Geithner, alarms sounded. Why didn't he even approach people like Brooksley Born, who warned us of this impending crisis years ago? Instead he turned to Geithner ( a Summers protege)and Summers, a proponent of the Gramm bill to deregulate the banking industry.
I don't think these questions should just be buried because Obama faces an economic crisis. He's chosen some of the architects of the crisis to lead us out...
No, duh...wire-tapping is great when you're in the driver's seat. This election was a sham. It wouldn't surprise me at all to find out that the whole damn thing was rigged--one world order, you know? But we'll never know, because our 'free' press is really just a big whore/tool for the agenda.
And, don't worry about losing the second amendment, all we have to do is outlaw the bullets. Ah, the inviting smell of tyranny...
Michael, I think Obama's showing that he can adjust to adversity. Take a look at the NYT front page story on Va.'s Cantor, the "new Newt Gingrich." The repubs are going to do their best to capitalize on the current crises in 2010. It's all out war right now. It MAY be that Obama's doing what he has to do to make any progress at all.
Also, I thought the "reality check" Obama faced was a democratic legislature that did not want to expunge the warrantless wiretapping authority, among other things. It's hardly his fault that his party's legislators took the due process issue away from him while he was asking for absolute party unit on the bailout. BS compromise, I'd say, but what's the choice? And in general, I think it's too soon to seize on just a few issues as bellwethers. Good signs include the Gitmo closing, the international abortion funding, the reversal on offshore oil drilling, and a few cabinet posts (Solis, Chu, Salazar, e.g.).
A lot will depend on the effect of the bailout. If things are as bad (or worse) this time next year, Cantor & Co. will have the opportunity they want. If that's the case, I have to admit I wonder if Obama's capable of
Gina, as usual, your insights are brilliant. You really make me think about these things, you know?
capable of winning the fight. Maybe, maybe not.
If you must know the truth, I've given up on politics in general. It's a no-win situation. If the idiots in this country are content to give up their basic freedoms, have at it.
I am brilliant, by the way. No need to tell me. Did you like the double-entendre about the outlawed bullets?
And Zoot, while I have your attention, if you wouldn't mind answering this question that I posed previously: how do you love a woman that could kill your child? You'd do me a tremendous favor by answering this mystery...it really boggles my mind.
Not that I don't listen to the warnings:
http://tinyurl.com/aeacge
huh?
I ain't payin' for that liberal rag...even if it tempts me with four free weeks...clicks mean only one thing to the media whores--advertising bucks.
Why don't you just paraphrase for us, please.
Cockburn tears into Obama's cabinet choices, etc. (Salazar is a coal industry shill, the Wall St. establishment has control of the bailout, etc.) Only Solis gets a passing grade. His rhetoric, as usual, is razor sharp. I like that guy.
And The Nation is left of liberal, Gina. Although it pretends otherwise. Do you know that Paul Newman's food profits kept the rag from fading away? Yeah. And the company still provides support, I think. So buy those fig newmans, ok?
Obama is a moderate, a compromiser in the battle between capital and labor (I mean, the people). He's compromising and it's no surprise. But he's better than what he replaced.
The Nation LEFT OF liberal? Yeah, one degree, once a year.
Hey Lefty, that's really cool art on your screen thingy. I've always wanted to photograph that kind of work...it's really wild stuff.Before I became a germophobe, I used to like to read graffiti in public restrooms. There's some really funny things written in the stalls. I'm ignoring your rainbow flag pin, though. I won't even ask...
This will get me in trouble with "Watching", but I don't care. John Boner (R-OH) is a total drama queen! To wit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvnwOjDjnH4
.
Go check out my latest, ferret, you might get a laugh.
Wow, what an insane bastard to suggest that the Senators and Representatives who are voted into office should actually READ the laws they are making. I hope his constituents remember his crazy talk come the next election.
You really think that post advanced your theory? Really?
-Still "Watching" the circus
Ms. Gina, Do you like Zapatistas? (They aren't shoe designers.)
But I can't get too worked up over decadent fashionistas (much less lifeless photography). I know a young woman who graduated from college here on the West Coast three years ago and went to NYC to become a fashion designer. She designed (and fitted) the dress worn by one winner at the SAG awards a few weeks back. Next day, the web critics had nothing but praise for the dress.
Is not this a great country, Gina, where a 24 year old kid can make it big in the fashion industry? Or is this playing field unlevel? Did the young woman have some unfair advantage?
Now I have to type in "paysteel." That's pretty good.
Which Zapatistas? The original ones, or the ones that absconded the philosophy?
I might be inclined to support the ideology of Emiliano, but for radical, leftist anarchists that see Che Guevara as a hero, no, I do not care for them or their methods at all. It doesn't mean I can't appreciate the vibrancy of their expression.
Maybe the whole point to my work is lifelessness.
I take it you thoroughly enjoyed Womack's book on Zapata? BS. You know nothing about Zapata.
Tell me this, fashion mama -- what color clothing did Zapata favor? Then why did Rivera paint him in white peasant clothes in that fine mural on the balcony of Palacio de Cortez in Cuernavaca? (Hint: two reasons.) Clothes are important to those who know, Ms. Gina. I suspect you do not know.
"Watching" - if you mean, advancing the notion that Boner is a drama queen, then yes, I do think it a success! They have staff to read the bills, and unfortunately, most people in DC don't read the entirety of the bills they vote on. Which is why they are so easily led - "medical care rationing" anyone??? I was actually embarrassed for Pence that he used that talking point last week. I'd be mortified if he actually represented me in Congress...
BTW, my watchful friend - the drama was in tossing the bill on the table after waving it about. You would have think after the smackdown that Barbara Boxer game Lindsey Graham last week, nobody would be so melodramatic...I wasn't counting on the orange wonder that is John Boner!!!
FH said boner he he. My WV is wadonize he he
I thought it stood for "Anonymous" ;-)
From Wiki:
"Douche usually refers to vaginal irrigation, the rinsing of the vagina, but it can also refer to the rinsing of any body cavity. A douche bag is a piece of equipment for douching - a bag for holding the fluid used in douching. To avoid transferring intestinal bacteria into the vagina, the same bag must not be used for a vaginal douche and an enema."
For the purposes of anonymous internet "insulture", where permissable by the guidelines of the blog to which you post; I'd say that "fuckwad" would be considerably less annoying and more to the point...
Oh, I don't know...A nice creaaaaaaaamy jonquil?
I know enough to know that he stood for something besides out and out thuggery.
I kid you not...wv:goome.
And, I was gonna suggest earlier that the proper term is douchebag. As is 'take your douchebag ideas and go back to France'...
Lefty...was does this mean to you:
Es mejor morir de pie que vivir de rodillas
Zapata was not much different than American Revolutionaries. His downfall was his impatience, I suppose. The problem with your movement is that you think you should use violence to win your cause. Zapata only resorted to violence as a last means to win justice. He had a just cause. I'm not so sure about your movement.
gina - for a truly successful movement, I suggest a diet high in fiber...
Ms. Gina:
The Zapatistas are the most peaceful revolutionary movement the western hemisphere has ever seen. The fact that Subcommandante Marcos has said respectful things about Che seems to be your only concrete gripe. Let it go. You're in over your head.
As to that famous feet/knees epigram you googled up, I would have to go back to check, but didn't Marti make that famous? Of course he did, many years earlier.
Adios.
Uh-huh. He was peaceful until he didn't get his own way. And he never stood for radical socialism or Marxism.
My guess is that you've never pulled a weed--unless it was for smoking-- in your life.
ggg
And, as usual, you're wrong, Ms. G.
Try Womack's book. Visit Cuernavaca and Tepotzlan, get an idea of what it was like for Zapata and his army to hide out in those hills.
Then go to San Cristobal, check out Na Balom, and, if you're willing to wear rubber boots, move toward the Lacandon rain forest. With all of that as background, you MAY be in a position to understand the Zapatista movement.
Also, may I recommend the mural on the southern wall of the City Lights building, in Jack Kerouac Alley? If you like public art and historical interpretation, you'll get a kick out of it.
In fact, I'll borrow a part of it, temorarily.
Thanks for the picture. I love folk art...especially when they're fightin' for something. Look at my music choices...that should tell you something about me.
Have you ever seen the Rivera mural at City College? It's been 20+ years since I've seen it, but it's a good one.
I've never been one to not listen to the complaints of others--or turn down an opportunity to learn a different perspective. I do reserve the right to disagree with that perspective based on what I know to be true and just. I'll admit that I'm no scholar on the subject of modern Zapatistas, but from what I gather, they are anarchists that think of Che as a hero and believe in the right of women to abort their young. As you might have gathered from me, I'm pro-life. I firmly believe that life is sacred, and one does not gain true justice or freedom by denying those rights of someone else.
And, just for the record, I wear rubber boots on a daily basis these days.
Didn't the founding fathers sport ponytails?
Well, then you're all set for adventure in Lacondon selva, Ms. G.
The Zapatistas love kids, by the way:
http://tinyurl.com/dza9m4
TS, and they wore wigs, too.
"Watching" is Reese? Figures. All he really knows how to do is attempt to provoke irritation in other people.
I'm with FH. If Gregg didn't think he could carry water for Obama on the stimulus, he should never have agreed to serve. A "team of rivals" is one thing, but this stimulus has been the focus of Obama's attention since he won the election. Given the precarious state of the economy, the Administration needs to speak with one voice on this issue right now.
I've monitored the ND Cal. website today for info. on the BBonds pretrial hearing. Came across some stuff related to the more significant challenge to the Bush/Obama wiretap policy. Renegade conservative Judge Walker is giving the government fits. This offers an interesting summary: http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a010509haramaincontinue
That's pretty cute, lefty. Junior?
I'm sure that Zaps do love children--as long as they don't get in the way of their mother or father.
Ponytails--the true sign of a non-conformist.
I hear you, gina. I let my freak flag fly. Unless I'm standing near a fan.
Mmmmmmm...ponytails. They're soooo hot.
I'm melting just thinking about yours, you big lug.
You sure have a way with women...or is it just me and my over-active imagination??
Unless you're a fan, gina, I don't have a ponytail. But I do have a serious wellie fetish.
Can I be your fan? I blow for at least 10 minutes straight.
And I'll wear my boots.
That's what you call a preciprocating fan.
Sweetie, as I learned from Chevy Chase on an old Weekend Update segment of SNL, you don't actually blow on it...
A reversible preciprocating fan.
Well, thanks you two. Now I'm totally confused. I could probably go longer if that helps.
J.M., I think I remember that. He was on the phone just before he started the news, right?
TedSpe - you are correct, sir! Again, I have no prize for you, except for a deep and abiding affection...
That all depends on the wellies... could you describe them in intricate detail? :)
Ted and FH, that particular Chevy Chase schtick was one of my favorites of his. He'd be speaking in a quiet voice into the phone about some suggestive topic ("no, I love it when you make noise, remember when..."), realize the camera was on, get a sheepish look on his face, and then put on his bland face to read the news.
http://snltranscripts.jt.org/75/75gupdate.phtml
hmm. Let me think. They're not very cute. Brown and rubbery.I want new ones,red ones in fact. Mine leak and my socks get wet when I go take pictures out on the ranch. And, they're big and cumbersome and and I'm always tripping over things. The other day, for instance, I was taking pictures of dead salmon and I tripped over a stick and fell right smack on my camera. I thought I broke my nose. Which, if you could see my nose, it's a very cute and adorable nose. Anyway, I really like cowboy boots rather than wellies. They suck. Wellies that is. Cowboy boots are much nicer looking. They fit better and they never leak. And, I look really good in them when I'm in my jeans...which is all of the time. You have to wear jeans around here or you'll ruin all of your good clothes. I have about five or six pairs. I have this one pair of cowboy boots--my favorite--these really, really cute red ones. They're hand tooled leather, and so comfortable. I got them for a really good price. Practically for free, if you consider what great boots they are. I think maybe you should develop a cowboy boot fetish. You know, 'cause I like cowboy boots better...and they feel so much better on.mmu
So, gina, let me see if I get this - you like cowboy boots? A lot?
Enough about your adorable nose, is your camera okay???
Hmmm... cowboy boots have always kind of worked the other way for me. Do you have any hip waders?
TooSense - you are a strange and wonderful man...
Why thank you, ferret... I think.
My camera is fine, thanks. It's got a scratch in the lens, though. Have you ever tried to work around a scratch? Because it's not easy. It creates annoying spots that must be dealt with in nothing less than a creative manner. You know, though, it's really good for the creative process.
And Mr. Sense. No, I do not have hip-waders--but my father does. Would you like to borrow them for some reason? And just for the record, have you ever had sex wearing nothing but red cowboy boots and pulled down jeans? Let me tell you, it's an experience you'll never forget?
Gina, It's the middle of February. Salmon run in mid to late summer. And you were taking photos of some still intact just "the other day?" I bet you live in the Tenderloin.
You should try having sex in hip waders. Talk about having to get creative. But they do offer more protection from hay bale outliers and split-rail fence splinters.
Hopefully your camera has interchangeable lenses...
Not the salmon where I live, ferret. They're all dead now, though...except for the fingerlings. And, would you please go away? I'm having a private conversation with Mr. Sense.
Hip waders, huh? I'll try almost anything at least once...especially if it sounds like fun. Hay is too itchy and in the smelly old barn.How about some nice green grass? I know lots of little hidden places where no one will find us...
My camera only has one lens--which is kinda ironic, seeing how I can be so single minded in my pursuit of things...
Not ironic, appropriate. Ironic would be if you had many lenses, but only a single vision.
BTW, that wasn't me who commented on the salmon. The group of letters before the word 'said' denote the person making the comment. In this case, that would be xootsuit.
Nothing in cyberspace is private...
Come to think of it, gina, with your fertile nature, I think a full on wetsuit might be best.
You know what happens when I start laughing...and, I get everything backwards--all the time. Do I have to keep reminding you of that? Just think of me as 'Bizarro Girl'.
Would you all just go away--except for you TS. You can stay--I have unfinished business to attend to with you.
You win, TS. You're more wickedly red than I...
I don't know, Gina. New story on sfgate about the data from last year's salmon run. The fish made it to the end of the line in the Sac. Valley during the Fall. The F&G scientists have been crunching the numbers ever since.
Now, as salmon get further and further up their fresh water streams, they deteriorate more and more. By the time they shoot their male and female wads, they're already already one degree away from being mulch. So I'm pretty skeptical about you stumbling across two perfectly intact ruby reds just "the other day."
Gina - if you want to have a private conversation, move it over to your own blog!
TooSense - (sigh...)
Don't worry. I'm strong. Anything less than full tackle and I'm just not in the mood.
Listen, Zoot. You don't know what you're talking about. I have a archive of pictures numbering in the thousands starting from about October of last year. I never said that picture of those those two were taken recently. I took that photo around the last week of December.
"The other day, for instance, I was taking pictures of dead salmon and I tripped over a stick and fell right smack on my camera."
.
Just wondering, Gina. Most dead salmon don't look like that. Maybe you found a bunch and arranged a pair for the shot. But late December is still pretty unlikely.
Can I move to change the name of the make out room to 'Gina & Xootie's Wrasslin' Wroom'
Uh, you're real sharp there, Zoot. I'll bet you make one helluva corporate attorney--unless you're really a clerk, or coffee boy. Those SPAWNING salmon were still alive.
Drink much tonight?
ggg
And, there is a possibility that I don't live in California. Big Clue.
ggg
I'm sorry Ts. I didn't mean to ignore you. That Zoot thing pisses me off.
Full tackle is good, very good. Especially with your big, broad shoulders leading the way...Yum.
ggg
Xoot...go check Dec. 18, 2008 entry. That wasthe first salmon I photographed. And before you go accusing people of a federal crime, you should know what in the hell you're talking about.
ggg
Do I get the last word here? Great. Gina, I don't believe you. I don't believe you captured a photo of two salmon spawning on Dec. 18. I think you're a liar. But that's ok. A lot of people think the web is the place for dishonesty, or fantasy projection. Fine. Go at it.
You'll never get the last word as long as there is a breath in my body. I never said the pair was taken on Dec. 18. And, I don't have to prove anything to you, asswipe.
Hey, ferret. I was doing some extra-curricular reading. It would seem that someone on the interweb is trying to tell us something about blogging and copyright infringement. Do you have permission to use those photos? 'Cause you know, even if there is no profit involved, you'd better have permission to use them. Or fat-asses like Suza will get on your case about being too prolific.
Gina, I appreciate your concern. I figure that the powers that be would probably go after blogs that are read by more than 6 people long before they get to me.
Oh, now ferret. You know how some people get their knickers in a twist--even over the dumbest things that are never meant the way they interpret them. I'm influenced by music, like it in the background.
And, you might as well know now, my real name is Jane.
You're up kinda early, ferret...couldn't sleep either?
GiJane - nope! I have been been having bouts of insomnia for years, now it seems like a daily occurence. I even had a sleep study done - mild apnea - I'm lucky to get 5 hours a night. Usually I just lay in bed, and catch a few winks before my alarm goes off. This morning, I just gave up and got out of bed. Really confused my cats, who have a very strict routine...
You, too? I've been better lately. Try warm milk and benedryl. Works for me.
And, what's with the GIJane reference? I'm groggy.
Internet integrity is the latest fad. It will pass momentarily.
Sorry, Jane. Sleep-deprived humor is funnier in the mind than on the screen. I was combining your previous incarnation with your present one...
Thanks for the sympathy. I've heard of the benadryl trick, but sometimes medication has the opposite effect on me - drowsy means wired, etc. Usually, I just cuddle with my kitty, and hope that hearing her purr will lull me back to sleep...works sometimes!
It appears that my intuition has not failed me.
wow, after all the bragging about the looks I was expecting something a bit more...incredible. Looks like a lot of my older sister's friends, but even older and much closer to mid-century than I thought from all the unbecoming bragging.
I enjoy FH's blog so much more since I learned to use the ignore feature. It's just lovely. Now I have two on my list.
:)
Let's see your mug, Suza. Care to be bold?
Jane, I deleted your comment...don't worry, looks like TooSense got the message!
But I liked that message. It was meant in the nicest way...so, uh, let me guess. You're the dynamic duo?
I guess the pig faced team knows all about internet integrity.
In fact, I'm issuing a challenge. Why doesn't everyone that hasn't, post their picture and their name?
Then we'll know all about internet integrity.
Come on chicken littles....bock, bock, bock...what ya afraid of?
Suza - there's an 'ignore' feature??? Why wasn't I informed??? Heads will roll!!!
chicken shit.
Jane - I don't know who peed in your wheaties this morning, but get off it! If you're so unhappy with all of us here, move on...
.
I've given my name, you insist on posting my entire birthday with alarming regularity, is it so much to want to keep my face to myself?
No. If we must insist on internet integrity from some, be fair and insist on it from all. Prove that you're not all the same person...show you're not stealing from the credibility and fairness pool.
Who is insisting on internet integrity? Are you talking about LaSalle's blog? (BTW another unhealthy obsession of yours...) Call me names if you want, but the more you want to see my face, the more I want to hide it from you. There is the whiff of stalker about you...
suza, two?
Gina or Jane or whatever you want to call yourself, you're sounding paranoid. FH is not TS is not Yogi is not Suza is not Zoot is not Ted is not me. Why do you have to make this so difficult? Whoops, I answered my own question at the start of this post.
Which reminds me of a commercial I've been getting a kick out of lately, for Volkswagen. They're flogging some "The People Want" theme, featuring various people in cars telling us what they want in a car (including a cute little girl who says, "The people want to go potty Right Now!").
Anyway, one fellow is driving with his girlfriend, and he says "The people want low maintenance" and then his girlfriend says, "Honey, I'm not high maintenance, am I?" and he says "No," but just as the scene changes, he turns his eyes towards the camera and puts on this ever so slight smirk. Cracks me up every time I see it.
I hate dishonesty. There is something definitely dishonest about ferret. I don't trust her--'cause I remember she said she was thirty-six.
And as for LaSalle. That man is a certified nut. Just because there's something sneaky and fishy and puzzling about him that I find interesting doesn't mean I'd stalk or harm either one of you. So, give up that claim, would you?
gina, it's a bit of the fun of online friendships to stretch a little truth, but I've found the more we all interact, and certainly with those we get a bit closer to, the more the stretches become obvious and fodder for self-deprecating humor. I know you could care less, but I actually find you, whoever you are, to be an interesting person-- when you aren't lapsing into hostility. For all the accusations of hostility directed toward you because you hold some unpopular viewpoints among this crowd, what I see is mostly reflected hostility, and softened, at that. Frankly, there's only one person on here who I feel I know with some intimacy. That does require trust, true, which is why most are so reluctant to go there, but I offer safety and have felt it reciprocated (actually, the other way around). With everyone else, I enjoy the long, slow bonding that comes with good old fashioned sharing of wit and wisdom and, sometimes, barbs. People have complimented your photography, celebrated birth despite being told we loathe it, helped in planning a marriage we're not likely to attend by default of being essentially strangers. Why not just accept that you're already one of this motley crew and let's make the best of it? If you were hated, we'd ignore you, and it seems you don't really hate us or you'd do the same. To quote one of your favorite songwriters, why not take some shelter from the storm?
I can't trust people that aren't honest, that's why. And I'm always so honest. It's not fair...and I hate injustice more than dishonesty.
Let's not forget that sometimes the truth about even ourselves is not always crystal clear. That's as much directed toward me as anyone else.
Going to a long lunch... not ignoring future posts...
too sense - enjoy your lunch.
two refers to both identities...
About hostility,TS. I know I get really angry, that's true. But I'm seriously outnumbered. Put yourself in my position. There's about 10 of you to one of me. You are mostly nameless, faceless creatures. You could all be different people, but a couple of you might be the same--because you sure all sound the same to me. You all come to each others defense when necessary, and I'm a solitary fighter. And, a girl besides--who's spent the last 20 years changing 15,000 diapers, washing 20,000 loads of laundry, and cooking 30,000 meals for children, when I could have been attending to my own interests. I'm a little defensive--not only am I unarmed, but I'm sailing in hostile territory. Lucky for me, my genes are tough ones.
Jane, I think you make the mistaken assumption that we're anti-family or anti-children on this board. Although right wing radio will tell you otherwise, not all of us view stay-at-home moms (if that's what you are) with disdain. Some people just don't choose to do that. I personally haven't chosen to have children in part because I've heard a lot of parents speak as you do-- that they feel they've given up so much to raise a family. I know plenty of parents who wouldn't have it any other way, too. I just know that I'd have a hard time with it, myself. But I don't feel that I'm lacking, any more than I feel a stay-at-home mom is lacking, provided that's truly what she wants for herself. In our lifetimes, birth control has always been an option, and I exercise it. You may not feel permitted to do so for religious reasons, but that is a limitation not imposed upon you by any of us. I haven't seen any cases on this blog where your reproductive choices have been attacked, but all of ours have been attacked by you. You're not in hostile waters. You've just brought a battleship to the sailing club.
Ya, sure. Says the mouth that says it's ok to kill a human. Talk about a battleship. In my mind there is nothing more aggressive or coarse in thinking than that. I 'm sure the Nazi's thought they were real finely-tuned sailboats, too. Don't kid yourself, Mr. Sense,you're no better--in fact worse because you support mass genocide--than our old 'friends' the cold-blooded killers.
And by the way, I'm flattered that you might consider me one of your 'motley crew', but it'll be a long, cold day in hell before I sink to your depths.
wv:tonals. This is too much!
Oh, well.
Oh, well? That's all you have to say for the deaths of 45 million innocently slaughtered Americans that were denied due process before someone denied them their right to life as intended by their Creator? Oh, Well?
You should give up. And that's probably why I seem to appear like a battleship to you. You can't fight the truth--it's bigger than you are and carries more weight. You have to fight with unfair and untrue and mean-spirited falsehoods.
"Oh well" is the resignation that comes from the realization that you have spent valuable time having a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.
Religious beliefs may not properly be the sole basis for laws in this country. A total ban on abortion is a law that is based entirely on a religious precept. It can't fly in a republic like ours where there is both freedom of religion from government interference and a ban on government establishment of religion. You may choose to have or abort your baby, but you can't force someone else to either have or abort hers on religious grounds alone. You can call it crude, but then again, so is life.
wv: tried. I have, I have.
Aside from the fact that there are very compelling scientific reasons why abortion is harmful to the common good, if what you're asserting is true, dsg, why did the founding father's mention a Creator? Why even put that in there at all?
Socialists may have been able to have shoved abortion down the throats of populace, but the facts are now really beginning to hit home...you're all products of your beliefs. You've become extinct. Life and our Creator got the last laugh. And your pride and arrogance won't admit defeat.
The creator is mentioned in the Declaration of Independence, which was the impetus of a bunch of private citizens of varying degrees of piety. The creator is not mentioned in the Constitution, which is the source of our laws. The Bill of Rights of the Constitution then goes on to specify the relationship between the government and religion (people have freedom of religion, and there is no establishment of religion). If you believe in the Christian God, doesn't the right to judge our sins belong to Him alone?
Here's what The Declaration of Independence says:
'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, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.'
And the Bill of Rights:
Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment 14 - Citizenship Rights. Ratified 7/9/1868. Note History
1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Here dsg---you cute guy. This is just for you:http://ineedashotofredemption.blogspot.com/
Jane D'oh - "Persons" being the operative word. Last I checked, you aren't god, so you don't get to decide for there rest of us when life begins. Considering that abortion was commonplace when the founders wrote the Declaration & Constitution, I think you'd have a little trouble convincing them of your point of view.
You have outsmarted yourself - your 'proof' disproves your point!
But, thanks for playing. Now let the adults get back to the important talk and go muck out a stall...
Considering that abortion was commonplace when the founders wrote the Declaration & Constitution, I think you'd have a little trouble convincing them of your point of view.
Prove it. And when your a drooling, shriveled up old lady in diapers, a non-functioning useless member of society,dependent upon the kindness and mercy of the children I raised, should they be bothered to think of you as a deserving person worthy of anything but what they meant to you? Considering what you stood for and your lack of a meaningful contribution to society? You took care of yourself and your own interests, you did nothing to contribute to the future and the responsibilities that must be carried. You played and played, and built a house of straw. And, then like the story, you're gonna want protection from the wolf when he comes knockin' at your door. Why should they let you in? What did you do for them? Why do they owe you anything?
Jane D'oh - if the future of this nation depends on the kindness and mercy of your spawn, god help us all!!!
Given the construction of the language used in the Bill of Rights in connection with citizenship, in particular "persons" and "born," it's clear to me that a person has to have been born to have any rights.
Person: (from Webster's dictionary)1: human, individual —sometimes used in combination especially by those who prefer to avoid man in compounds applicable to both sexes
I know you libs are ignoramuses when it comes to understanding basic biology, but from the moment of conception, we're a genetically complete human individual, therefore, by standard definition, a person.
'nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.'
There is no part in that statement that says anything about born or naturalized citizens. It just says any person. The Declaration says: 'inalienable right to life.' Inalienable means, non-transferable. If you don't believe me, look it up.
Great, let's take that genetically complete individual and see how it survives outside of the womb - without a heart, lungs, or brain...Other than the lungs part, that sounds like someone who posts here!
And Gina, did you ever look at my post from a while back with regard to the YMCA and developmental assets?
ferreti--no one could survive out side the womb without the aid other others...and you know it. It's not about certain people having more power than others or who gets to decide who lives and dies. It's about equal status. The fact is, that if we consider ourselves equal, the right to life should be determined by our Creator--'cause that's what they said. Once you start giving that power to a separate group of people, then you create inequality. Those are the facts. If you want to create inequality in one area, be prepared to have inequality in other areas. Which is one reason why I can't get fully behind Mr. Iamanoppressedblackman Obama.
I did, dsg. Very admirable. But if we apply your philosophy to your life when it's your turn to be the defenseless one, you will have to be willing to live, or die with the results. Are you prepared to face the reality that one day--when you're the faceless, useless, dependent one--that you should be held in lesser regard than more fully functioning humans?
I hope the future citizens of this country show more compassion and mercy than what you were willing to show them.
Gina, for the record, I've also done a lot of work with a local nonprofit that provides low-cost housing to the elderly.
Sorry, Gina, your definition of person is not legally valid.
I'm impressed, really am.
That's what they'll tell you, you know. When it's your turn. Mark my words.
'Sorry, Mr. Gonzales, it's time to go.Your definition of person is not legally valid.'
And unlike how it will be for me, there will be no one there to stop them. Just sayin'.
Hey, dsg.I just read all of your douchebag friends nasty comments about trolls over on that hosebag MLS site, and you gotta a lotta nerve comparing me to that gasbag.
Just what is it that you think I'm saying with pictures--considering that you've been the subject of at least three of them? So, uh, you can crawl inside my head and tell me what I'm thinking now? Ask me anything you wanna know--I'll give you an honest answer.
And, what's wrong with being pro-life?
probono
Hey Gavone, twas I who made that comparison, not dsg. Get your douchebags straight, although I'm sure you have enough hatred for everyone.
Nothing's wrong with being Pro-Life; the problem is in having a one-track mind that disables you from discussing anything rationally. Since the only way you can persuade people to your side is to call them douchebags, I don't see much hope in your swaying anyone, so what is your goal, other than garnering the attention you seem to crave so badly?
And why DON'T you post over at MSM if you are so obsessed with the place, you're giving them plenty of clicks whether you post there or not. Hearst LOVES you!!!
WV: derse
Hate is not the correct word. It's more like cantstandya. Get it now? And,,,,,,I,specifically, do not remember, addressing you,Douchebag. So go piss off.....
Sincerely, The Gavone.
wv:swanso
And, furthermore, I am not obsessed with the Hearse Corpse...I am tracking their progress--or lack of it. I'm just waiting to see when they final give it up and shut down the paper. It's just a matter of time. I shall laugh, because they finally got what they deserve.
A Spaniard never forgets.
Like Montresor, perhaps? Pissing off now... ;-)
Very funny. No one has to do anything vengeful.Just sit back and watch. They did it to themselves. People wouldn't have flocked to the interwebs if liberal newspaper's hadn't given them good reason to. You can't call yourself impartial and then lie about it without the truth catching up with you.
Besides, think of the precious natural resources that will be saved. You should see what a paper company can do to a hillside. It's despicable. I can posy a picture if you'd like. And then the libs blame the rancher's for stream degradation when in fact, it's them.
excuse me, post a picture.
Ah, Gina, why do you presume that being pro-choice is anti-life? It's all about faith vs. reason in my book, and there are many reasons to allow abortion yet restrict or ban the taking of already-born life (again, the golden rule provides a guide).
It has nothing to do with my faith. It has everything to do with fairness and human dignity. I'm really getting tired of trying to explain myself. At this point, you either see it or you don't. Now all I can say is be prepared to live with your choices and in the end, don't say someone didn't try to warn you while you still had a chance to do something about it.
I mean, if I'm a person of conscience, and I saw you going down the wrong road and didn't try to warn you of where it was going because I saw something you couldn't see, how would I live with myself?
Gina, that was Torquemada's argument. Face it, without a religious basis, your position just doesn't hold water factually
I don't see the comparison. Except maybe I'm a little inquisitive. I'd have made a great attorney if I had had the proper training, wouldn't I? And then I had to go and marry an attorney's son--who also happened to venture into politics. I love to argue. But I'm really finished this time. Got nothin' more to say to you, dear.
Here dsg--a little picture of what to expect 40 years from now --only multiplied (fromsfgate):
''I don't feel sorry for people just because they are seniors. They should be smart enough (they were certainly wealthy enough) to PLAN for their own retirement years. I hope they enjoyed the savings that prop 13 brought them all those years. ” by steffles
Post a Comment