More Active Posts
Front Page
Whirled Views 5.29
 |
 48 Comments |
Good day to y’all!
Today’s quote is from a psychologist: “The greatest use of life is to spend it for something that will outlast it.”
 |
Topic: WorldMagBlog |  |
Email a friend |
 |
Keywords: |  |
RSS 2.0 |
 |
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed. |  |
Share this: |
One more diversion
William James - who also said, “No matter how full a reservoir of maxims one may possess, and no matter how good one’s sentiments may be, if one has not taken advantage of every concrete opportunity to act, one’s character may remain entirely unaffected for the better. With mere good intentions, hell is proverbially paved.”
Can you believe that Scott McClellan and his poisoned pen tell-all on his time in the White House? Bush will be faulted for many things, but certainly his chief error was in not vetting his appointees for both competence and principles-based convictions (ie Douglas Feith, McClellan, George Tenet).
Condoleeza pretty much let him have it this morning. It’s fairly obvious that Scott is twisting things.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080529/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/rice_mcclellan_book
Sawgunner : I think the reason lies with $$. That said, for better or worse, McClellan is not in the same category as Feith or Tenet — he’s one of the Texas crew, thus the louder howls of outrage.
There’s a liar’s paradox here, too. If you believe he’s lying now, why should we think he was telling the truth then?
Ah! Make this a thread. I see 100, 200 no! 300 possible posts… After all what’s band width for?
Heh heh. Yeah, the reason so many ex-Bushies keep condemning their boss is not because he’s corrupt and incompetent, but because he doesn’t vet his appointees enough. Either that or they’re just in it for the cash.
Surely it can’t be that they’re right and there are significant problems with the George W. Bush presidency. Balderdash. There’s no evidence of that whatsoever. That is, there’s no evidence after you’ve dismissed any evidence as sour grapes or greed.
Here’s my favorite part:
That Bastion of Lunatic Liberal Lies, The Washington Post
All these staffers bear out the maxim: Victory has a 1,000 fathers while defeat is an orphan
Samuel got the quote yesterday too … at least I didn’t know who it was by today.
McClellan’s mama most likely lined up the DC job for both him and his brother. (Carol Keeton Strayhorn is a fixture in Texas politics, or at least she was).
Not sure what overseas experience, ed credentials or expertise Scotty brought to the table.
Samuel: Enjoy your virtual coffee!
Thanks for the quote, Samuel. Now I know where my mother got her “the road to hell his paved with good intentions.”
I heard Ari Fleischer say this morning that McClellan wasn’t privy to the Iraq briefings and therefore had no inside knowledge because he was covering domestic issues and had no access. So, can he really write with authority for things that occurred before he became the press secretary? And even then, was he really sitting inside all those meetings where decisions were being made. I don’t think so. I still have a paperback somewhere called “Speaking Out” written by, I believe, Reagan’s press secretary, the name escapes me. What I recall was his hatred for Ollie North, or perhaps it was jealousy. The author wanted the reader to believe that North was this rogue working on his own in the basement of the White House. I never believed that. I think that admin. used his roguish tendencies to their advantage and then denied he was ever given orders. The author was never privy to what really happened there either. McClellan “knows” some things for sure, but other things are his opinion and speculation. Time will tell. And quite frankly, even if he were 100% correct, which I doubt, we still have to wait to see if in the long run taking Saddam out was wrong. That will come in time, too.
There is a pathetic spectacle taking place in NJ. The Matos-McGreevey divorce hearing has gone public. She claims she didn’t know he was gay. He claims he’s unemployable now because he is. So, in addition to paying for the improvements to his condo (i.e., new floors, plumbing, etc.), she also testified that they had a $30,000 wedding and that she paid for it. One could expect splitting the cost of a wedding. Inasmuch as she had to pay for the wedding, don’t you think that should have told her something? Maybe not that he was gay, but SOMETHING?
NJ Lawyer, it’s my understanding that the wedding is nearly always the responsibility of the bride or her family (traditionally her family–in my own family, it’s the bride and not her family who foots the bill).
#13 Cheryl,
I dont guess my inlaws got that memo.
In complete seriousness now, I’ve seen couples like my wife and I. Both in late 20s to mid30s range. Education done, steady-if-not-high-paying jobs. Neither of us would have felt comfy asking my post office letter sortor and former marine father-inlaw to pony up for our wedding. (He had two other daughters)
I have seen lavish costly weddings go for naught when the couple divorced within 6 years
#11 Njlawyer: that was Larry Speakes. An interesting read. I esp liked the pic of him with fellow Mississippian Elvis Presley
I confess that I am a member of the NEA (National Education Assoc.). Yesterday I got their latest attempt to get me to vote Democratic. It is a brochure with an old looking book cover tying McCain to Bush’s education policies (never mentioning the Ted Kennedy was a sponsor of NCLB). There is a picture of Bush and McCain in the old fashioned lithograph style (“yellowed” with age for effect) and a quote, which is supposed to make me not want to vote McCain):
That makes me think McCain is the one to vote for, not against. But personally, I have other reasons not to vote for him, like his last 8 years in the Senate promoting other liberal/Democratic ideas.
#12
Unemployable because he’s gay?
How is he at interior design?
I don’t understand where this hated for Bush came from other than the Florida election of 2000. I have always thought that was the only reason Dems hated him so. If there is any other reason, please tell me.
Cheryl, I know what you mean about the parents paying, but these two weren’t kids. She paid for it with her own money, he has a law degree, was gainfully employed as a mayor. It’s more like Sawgunner’s situation. I think she was put on notice about something — at least that he’s cheap!
Yes, Sawgunner, McGreevey had an expert witness testify that he’s unemployable due to the “scandal.” After he left office, he went to a major law firm for a few months, then moved in with his guy who has big bucks, and now is studying for the Episcopalian priesthood. He wrote a book and made money that way, too. I personally think he should support his daughter, and while I don’t agree with his ex-wife that she should have the same perks she had as a governor’s wife, he could at least get a job and support the family he created. He wasn’t disbarred, he just doesn’t want to do that anymore, he wants his pal to support him, but that man is under no obligation to support the ex-wife or child. (He’s lousy at interior design — they fought that out last year when he hung a smutty picture on the wall which she didn’t want the child to see.)
I just think the court should make him pay for his child and not indulge his whining. Thanks for listening.
Bob Buckles, I was working for the judge prior to that election, and I heard many people “in power” calling Bush stupid. They really didn’t like him. They understood the Supreme Court decision because that was their “business,” so I never heard complaints about the ruling (though they mocked the Florida appellate courts for the way they fudged rulings in the face of the evidence taken). I think the Dems focused their hatred on Bush because of the impeachment of Bill Clinton. They really didn’t see anything wrong with perjury, and they still don’t.
I didn’t mean to imply that any judge didn’t see anything wrong with perjury. I meant Dems in general.
Cal Thomas has a poignant article today, titled “How do you spell F-R-A-U-D?”
He points out that Paul Kanjorski, a 12-term Congressman, made a telling statement at a town meeting last August in his Pennsylvania district, about the 2006 election in which the Dems won a majority. Kanjorski acknowledged that he and his fellow Democrats “sort of stretched the facts” (to win votes) about their intention to end the war in Iraq and bring American troops home.
There is a YouTube video of his remarks, which shows Kanjorski explaining that Democrats pushed the rhetoric about the war “as far as we can to the end of the fleet — didn’t say it, but we implied it — that if we won the congressional elections we could stop the war.”
Cal Thomas added, “Democrats also promised to bring down gas prices if they won a majority. That worked out well, didn’t it?”
Wat Kanjorski admitted to is fraud. Thomas wrote; “…while huffing and puffing about it, Democrats have continued to approve funds for Iraq and Afghanistan, attaching numerous pet pork projects.”
This means that Democrats became a majority through fraud. They should be held accountable for their irresponsible rhetoric on the war.
The problem is that nobody cares what Democrats promise. All that matters (to too many voters today) is how they make you feel at the moment.
NJ Lawyer, I always figured that if I get married, the wedding is my responsibility. (When my sister got married, she footed the bill; one of our brothers helped her some, and so did I.) But after we’re married, it really won’t matter who paid–the money will be ours together. And as someone who doesn’t expect to support the household, the money would actually be primarily his. So really, if it’s up to the couple (and not their parents), then it doesn’t matter who paid for the wedding unless they set up prenuptial agreements or something of the sort.
Not believing in divorce, I wouldn’t agree to marry a man who wanted a prenuptial agreement. What God has joined together, let not man put asunder. Now, if only the courts would recognize the one who breaks up the marriage as the covenant breaker, and support the “innocent” party in a divorce, with finances in that person’s favor and child custody.
Scottie McClellan is a very bad man. A Loyal Bushie that has been with W since his Texas days has suddenly developed a conscience? Don’t be surprised when you see him testifying before the Judiciary Committee.
Joel-
You want to see someone say anything to get elected? Watch Bush’s speech from the 2000 RNC
Meanwhile, the nightmare in Myanmar/Burma continues. This in from a local missionary:
Dear friends,
Thank you again for praying for us and the people of Burma. Many lives have lost to the cyclone. Surviving the cyclone is not easy either. Many people are still using water from rivers and lakes littered with dead bodies of human and animals. Heavy rains followed by the cyclone gave the survivors fresh water to drink but making it hard for them to stay dry. Also, many face diseases such as dysentery, diarrhea, pneumonia, malaria and cholera.
One local donor visited the area and called the situation hell on earth.
Many survivors who lost everything, including their house, refused to leave the area because once they leave the area, the authorities take over their land (thanks to socialist policy adopted back in 1964).
Things are not getting easier with the coming of monsoon season, next month. One thing the survivors urgently asked for is rice seed. Without that, they will be without food for a long time. UNICEF estimates there are about 2000 orphans so far. They are vulnerable from diseases and abduction. Many fear the military government will force them into army. Burma army is notorious for using child soldiers.
http://tinyurl.com/3ozsgb
Joel Mark–
Got a link to the Cal Thomas article?
I hear you, Cheryl. There’s just something about this situation with McGreevey. He’s always living on someone else’s dime, so to speak, and he wants to squirm out of paying child support. Obviously, that irritates me.
Once a couple is married, I think the money, regardless of who actually earns it, belongs to both of them because they are now one. I agree with you about the prenup. If I got married, I would be leery about the love of a man who wanted one. (And I don’t mean just because of my age. I understand someone wanting to protect the inheritance of one’s children, but that can be accomplished by means other than a prenup (a will or trust).) I guess I look at McGreevey not contributing to the wedding the same way. It’s as if he went into the marriage without the desire to become one, and evidently that’s so. He needed a family to go further in politics and had his eye on the White House. He was protecting his own self-interest. I mean, if the marriage meant something to him, he would have said, “it’s my wedding, too, we’re both adults, we’re both working, here’s what I can afford.” He didn’t. If I had been Dina, I would have been hurt by that, and I would have thought twice about marrying a man who didn’t want to contribute to the wedding. Maybe I know too many facts about this character to be objective. I can’t figure out how a court is going to force him to go to work anyway, so I’m thinking Dina’s going to be the sole provider here.
Not a peep on the national news about Maxine Waters huge gaffe. She threatens to “Sociali.. err… take over” Big Oil. What she means is that her liberal agenda is to Nationalize all the Big Oil companies.
Yeah. The worked out well for Hugo Chavez and Venezuala didn’t it?
Oh yeah. I forgot. You can see this silly senator from California come clean about the liberal agenda here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KN6s1KVFBNg
Oh.. and Rush says Maxine should be placed on Obama’s short list for vice-president.
Now Evangelical Marines are working against our interests in Fallujah. How stupid can these guys be?
Just home from the hospital. I went to try to get my dad to eat (drink some nutrition) this morning. He asked me to take him to the emergency room!!!! He will be in through the weekend at least. They are talking about putting a feeding tube directly in his stomach. His regular primary doctor was not available today so his partner came to see daddy. She was wonderfull!!! She just talked to him. Sat on the edge of the bed to examine him. Told him he was going to feel lower than a snakes belly before this was all over, but to let her worry about it. She asked if he really wanted to go to Mobile to an oncologist or if he preferred to stay on our side of the “creek” (Mobile Bay). He wants to stay over here which makes it easier on my stepmother and me. We took care of the living will today. Regina is is primary healthcare proxy and I am his secondary, which is fine by me. The only thing that I did have a problem with is that he signed not to be kept alive with a feeding tube should it be determined that he would not survive otherwise. Later when we went to lunch I told her I can let cancer take him but I cannot watch him lie in a bed and starve to death. He grew up hungry and was never full. She agreed with me. So far she and I have been on the same page about everything. I pray that we will continue to be. He still does not want all of his brothers and sisters to know what is going on and my Aunt Virginia is determined that the others know it, so I am going to have to dial her down a bit, but that will work out. The cancer is worse than I was first led to believe. He is still my daddy and trying to protect me. I am still optimistic. I think now things are going to start moving at a better pace and I feel good about the hospital, doctors, and care he is going to receive. I would appreciate your continued prayer. I asked Regina to have her Pastor come see daddy. The only church he has attended in the last 10 years has been the Lutheran, even if they won’t let him have communion:) Daddy likes the Pastor and I think it would be a comfort for him.
Kim-
I’m sorry to hear about your dad. You’re a good daughter.
McCain sure has some dirty people associated with his campaign.
Crossing Jordan: Iraq fuel deal sparks lawsuit
McCain fundraiser and War Profiteer sued by partner in lucrative contract with U.S. military
and there’s another scandal today
McCain economic policy shaped by lobbyist:
Swiss bank paid McCain co-chair to push agenda on U.S. mortgage crisis
Just say no to McW and his campaign for special interests
Here’s someone Joel can trust.
“Add me to the growing list of those who are having great difficulty understanding McClellan’s motives. I spent two years as a White House reporter, much of it during McClellan’s reign. At no time did Scott ever indicate, either publicly or privately, he had the misgivings he expressed in this book.
What I hear about the book does not sound like the Scott McClellan I knew for two years. I can say without fear of contradiction, that I knew Scott better than any other White House correspondent or Washington reporter.” -Jeff Guckert Gannon, male prostitute and fake news reporter hidden in the press corpse
sorry- 36 should have gone in the McClellan Tells The Truth section.
Dear Kim, I am so sorry to hear about your dad. I am praying for you, your dad and Regina.
You mentioned that the Lutheran Church wouldn’t let our dad have communion — if there is a Chaplains office in the hosptial, contact them, tell them your dad wishes to have communion, they will arrange it, OR ask your pastor if he would visit your father and bring the communion to him. My dad used to do this all the time.
God bless you.
Love, Victoria
Kim - My heart & prayers go out to you. I lost my dad to cancer about 3 & 1/2 years ago. I know how it feels to be all grown up but still “Daddy’s little girl”.
Now my mom has terminal cancer (ovarian).
The death of a parent is so sad, & so hard to deal with, but remember that God is right there with you, for you to lean on.
When my dad died, I did not know whether or not he had finally come to the Lord in his last hours. Somehow, God has given me a peace to not know, but to continue to trust in His goodness.
Thank you all for your support and prayers. It is hard for me to explain to people what a little community I have here at worldmagblog.
Kim,
I’m sorry. This is tough, I know. I haven’t lost a parent (or any relative) to cancer, but have lost both parents. It’s not easy, and dealing with uncertainties is particularly difficult. Do see if he’s willing to change that line about the feeding tube–the doctors will enforce that if it’s his stated wish, and it’s possible you may need to go that route. (A good book I edited a few years ago, The Right to Die?</i?–about euthanasia but also about death–did make the point that part of the dying process may include losing the desire to eat. That book, or others like it, might help you know how to help your dad. I forget the author, but Moody was the publisher.)
Again, I am sorry. This isn’t an easy time.
Kim,
It’s hard to know what to say, but I am sorry about your Dad’s situation. Just know that I’ll be praying for you and all of your family. Keep us posted.
Kim,
Know that you’re in our prayers. Do try to have someone bring the Lord’s Supper to him if he wants it.
Kim, I’m so sorry about your dad. I pray that all of you will feel God’s peace and comforting presence as you go through this together.
Kimberly,
I don’t have the Cal Thomas link, but this one is on the same topic. It’s from Pulitzer prize winning combat journalist Jeff Emanuel. The congressman basicly admits that they lied to the people. There’s a video of it too.
http://tinyurl.com/47vh8l
This one has a nice commentary with it from a youtube poster.
http://tinyurl.com/5dyo6j
And I would also recomend checking out this link.
http://tinyurl.com/6f3dp6
It’ s from March 08, so it’s about 2 months old. But it didn’t get much play from the media. It’s from 2 Harvard economists that studies the link between public dissent in the US, and increased attacks against civilians and US troops.
From the link:”The study—“Is there an ‘Emboldenment’ Effect? Evidence from the Insurgency in Iraq”—concludes that “there is a small but measurable cost to open public debate in the form of higher attacks in the short term.”
But the paper quickly denounces the conclusion that public dissent is necessarily bad.
“It was not possible, from the data available, to determine whether insurgent groups increased the overall number of attacks against American and Iraqi targets in the wake of public dissent and debate or simply changed the timing of those attacks,” Monten and Inyengar find.
Either way our troops suffered. It’s also why I think that those who say the blood is on Bush’s hands, should look at their own blood stained hands. Terrorist can read too. It may not be exactly treasonous, but it’s pretty darn close.
AJ- “It didn’t get much play” because that is a working paper. Not a published paper. And it appears unlikely the paper will ever be published.
From one review-
“Given these deficiencies it is clear that Iyengar and Monten are either incapable of careful research and rational argument, or more ignominiously, are intentionally distorting their data and conclusions in a clumsy attempt to portray their political agenda as science. Sadly, it seems more likely the latter as the researchers do clearly recognize and acknowledge the inadequacies of their argument but yet continue to draw conclusions not indicated by their findings.”
Is there a study looking at the Emboldenment Effect of Abu Graib? Of the destruction of the infrastructure of their country, the unavailability of water and electric, etc.?
Wait. One of the authors of the flawed unpublished paper is a political scientist and the other a health economist.
And it got play on FOX News, Washington Post, UPI, USNews, and rightwingnews.com
It just isn’t credible or published. That’s all.