So the President of France, an unapologetic conservative, recently came over for a visit and made a stirring speech.
>>>
SARKOZY (via translator): To the millions of men and women who came from every country of the world and who -- with their own hands, their intelligence, and their hearts -- built the greatest nation in the world, America did not say, "Come, and everything will be given to you." Rather, she said, "Come, and the only limits to what you will be able to achieve will be those of your own courage, your boldness, and your talent." (applause)
SARKOZY (via translator): The America that we love throughout the world impedes this extraordinary ability to grant each and every person a second chance, another chance, because, in America, failure is never the last word. There is always another chance. Here -- in your country, on this soil -- both the humblest and the most illustrious citizens alike know that nothing is owed to them and that everything has to be earned. That is what constitutes the moral value of America. (applause)
<<<<
All I can say is wow. He gets it better than most Americans do.
We are entitled to nothing. Everything must be earned. Wow.
Viva' la' France!
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Thursday, November 08, 2007
10 Things To Put You at Ease
1. I believe the government has no business legislating morality.
2. I abhor abortion, but I believe the best way to have less of them is to keep it safe and legal.
3. The war on drugs has failed. It's time for legalization, pretty much across the board.
4. Faith has a place in our government, specific religion does not.
5. If two guys are in love and want to get married, who are we to judge and say they can't?
6. Bible thumping televangelists are repulsive. The God I believe in isn't short of cash.
7. The death penalty is wrong. So is letting pedophiles out of prison, ever.
8. I don't like Hilary Clinton, but if she becomes president I would still be thrilled to meet her.
9. I want the troops to come home. (After they win of course.)
10. Chris hardly ever speaks about himself in the third person.
2. I abhor abortion, but I believe the best way to have less of them is to keep it safe and legal.
3. The war on drugs has failed. It's time for legalization, pretty much across the board.
4. Faith has a place in our government, specific religion does not.
5. If two guys are in love and want to get married, who are we to judge and say they can't?
6. Bible thumping televangelists are repulsive. The God I believe in isn't short of cash.
7. The death penalty is wrong. So is letting pedophiles out of prison, ever.
8. I don't like Hilary Clinton, but if she becomes president I would still be thrilled to meet her.
9. I want the troops to come home. (After they win of course.)
10. Chris hardly ever speaks about himself in the third person.
Monday, November 05, 2007
Choices
My last couple of posts have been particularly passionate, okay - downright ornery. So maybe I need to lighten things up a bit.
Like a goofball, I love collecting the state quarters.
My favorites are
and
Both designs are highly detailed, yet simple and beautiful. There is no sledgehammer to the face - on the nose, THIS IS STATE X! Such as with this not so great design...
Yuk. Too obvious, no subtlety, cluttered. Spelled out and clunky. If you actually have to have the SHAPE of the state on the dang coin, at least make it look cool and majestic, like this beauty...
Not my favorite style, but perfectly executed.
A couple more that I really like...
Now that's majestic. Again simplicity rules, but it's not an absolute. This next one is super detailed, it could have been a disaster, but it's stunning.
And here are two quarters that I detest. (As much as I CAN detest them, State Quarters are just so darn cool!)
First we have
Please don't post "Why do you hate Helen Keller?" comments, my annoyance at this quarter has nothing to do with her. I know she was heroic and stuff. It's just, what in the blazes does she have to do with Alabama? Other than the coincidence of her being born there?
Now, I don't know much about Alabama - but doesn't it have something interesting or beautiful that we can put on the quarter besides a brave lady. I'm sorry, I don't get it. This thing smacks of the worst kind of political correctness; whoever made this decision was clearly not interested in aiming towards truth and beauty about the state - rather they had their sights set on assuaging guilt and making people "feel okay". Blech.
But the sanctimoniously offensive Alabama quarter pales in comparison to the worst one of all.
Let's not make something classic and gorgeous, let's not be intellectual in a good way. And please, let's not be clear, simple and powerful. Let's spoon feed everyone specifically what we THINK is great about the state.
I know there was a contest for the design, but I'm shocked that this cluttered mess was chosen by the people of California. What a PC nightmare. It's actually laughable.
A redwood tree, check. Halfdome, okay, check. The California Condor! (The ultimate endangered species.) Check! And how can we be subtle about this? Hmmm...I've got it!
Let's LITERALLY PUT JOHN MUIR ON THE COIN! THAT LOOKS GREAT!
Um, it sucks. Ugly and patronizing. Smug to the extreme, everything I can't stand about modern liberals.
The California quarter should have been the Golden Gate with a sunset. That's it. Simple, beautiful, iconic.
Instead we get JOHN MUIR HIMSELF!! AND HE WILL TEACH ALL YOU ENVIRONMENT HATERS THAT THE CALIFORNIA CONDOR (which, oh yeah, has never been seen anywhere near Yosemite) WILL FLY OVER YOU AND SHOW YOU HOW TO NOT BE SUCH A MONEY GRUBBING BASTARD!!!!
Oye. Did I say I was going to lighten up?
Like a goofball, I love collecting the state quarters.
My favorites are
and
Both designs are highly detailed, yet simple and beautiful. There is no sledgehammer to the face - on the nose, THIS IS STATE X! Such as with this not so great design...
Yuk. Too obvious, no subtlety, cluttered. Spelled out and clunky. If you actually have to have the SHAPE of the state on the dang coin, at least make it look cool and majestic, like this beauty...
Not my favorite style, but perfectly executed.
A couple more that I really like...
Now that's majestic. Again simplicity rules, but it's not an absolute. This next one is super detailed, it could have been a disaster, but it's stunning.
And here are two quarters that I detest. (As much as I CAN detest them, State Quarters are just so darn cool!)
First we have
Please don't post "Why do you hate Helen Keller?" comments, my annoyance at this quarter has nothing to do with her. I know she was heroic and stuff. It's just, what in the blazes does she have to do with Alabama? Other than the coincidence of her being born there?
Now, I don't know much about Alabama - but doesn't it have something interesting or beautiful that we can put on the quarter besides a brave lady. I'm sorry, I don't get it. This thing smacks of the worst kind of political correctness; whoever made this decision was clearly not interested in aiming towards truth and beauty about the state - rather they had their sights set on assuaging guilt and making people "feel okay". Blech.
But the sanctimoniously offensive Alabama quarter pales in comparison to the worst one of all.
Let's not make something classic and gorgeous, let's not be intellectual in a good way. And please, let's not be clear, simple and powerful. Let's spoon feed everyone specifically what we THINK is great about the state.
I know there was a contest for the design, but I'm shocked that this cluttered mess was chosen by the people of California. What a PC nightmare. It's actually laughable.
A redwood tree, check. Halfdome, okay, check. The California Condor! (The ultimate endangered species.) Check! And how can we be subtle about this? Hmmm...I've got it!
Let's LITERALLY PUT JOHN MUIR ON THE COIN! THAT LOOKS GREAT!
Um, it sucks. Ugly and patronizing. Smug to the extreme, everything I can't stand about modern liberals.
The California quarter should have been the Golden Gate with a sunset. That's it. Simple, beautiful, iconic.
Instead we get JOHN MUIR HIMSELF!! AND HE WILL TEACH ALL YOU ENVIRONMENT HATERS THAT THE CALIFORNIA CONDOR (which, oh yeah, has never been seen anywhere near Yosemite) WILL FLY OVER YOU AND SHOW YOU HOW TO NOT BE SUCH A MONEY GRUBBING BASTARD!!!!
Oye. Did I say I was going to lighten up?
Thursday, November 01, 2007
We HATE the troops.
Sorry kids, I'm just a cranky "evil conservative" these days. I blame it on Berkeley, my teachers and peers who drilled into me to always question - never take anything at face value; they've created a monster.
So congressman Pete Stark 2 weeks ago had these lovely remarks about our President and our troops.
"Republicans sure don't care about finding $200 billion to fight the illegal war in Iraq. Where are you going to get that money? Are you going to tell us lies like you're telling us today? Is that how you're going to fund the war? You don't have money to fund the war or children. But you're going to spend it to blow up innocent people if he can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the President's amusement."
Even House Speaker Pelosi had the decency to call him out on this at the end; reminding congress members to refrain from personal attacks on the president. My respect for her grew a bit as she chastised the clearly insane congressman. (Though we all know that deep down George W. Bush HATES children and delights in our soldiers being decapitated by explosives.)
I suppose I'm naive for wanting everyone on the same page, for all of us to just accept certain things. The president and our troops deserve respect. The 9/11 hijackings were not perpetrated by our government. I must be out of my mind.
Eventually Stark apologized, and seemed genuinely remorseful for his remarks. Fine, we all say stupid things, apology accepted. But what bothers me about his remarks most, is that I suspect deep down - that not only do some people not like that our troops are in Iraq, they simply just don't like our troops.
Case in point, "Redacted" is a movie that's out, directed by Brian DePalma, that details the true life story of marines in Iraq who raped and murdered a young girl and killed her family as well. Horrible stuff that should certainly be held up to the light of truth, exposed for everyone to see and the perpetrators brought to justice.
In fact. this is a story that has been covered by most media outlets; and the soldiers involved are all likely to spend the rest of their lives in prison - and may even face the death penalty thanks not to the diligence of the anti-war crowd, but the military itself which brought the story to light in the first place and has been exemplary in providing both a vigorous investigation and prosecution of the monsters that did this.
But DePalma wants to take it further; it isn't enough to point out a few bad apples. His movie and his mindset are pointedly directed at proving that fundamentally, the military is predisposed to this behavior. And our unjust and illegal war is making monsters out of our men.
Of the systematic and mass torture, rape and murder that went on under Sadaam Hussein for a quarter of a century - he remains mum.
Of the mutilations of our soldiers, and the mass killings of Muslims by al qaeda over the last five years - DePalma has nothing to say.
He has to make a movie, graphically detailing the very worst thing a soldier could do - and hold it up as what is representative of our military as a whole. Let's not kid ourselves, this is what he's doing.
No mention of the lives our troops have saved, of the infrastructure they are helping rebuild. The recent success of the surge, the flat out crippling of al qaeda.
He can't even put together a thoughtful look at the many legitimate arguments against the war. He has to sensationalize and brutalize - both the victims of the crime and the US military at large.
He is also ignorant of history and the nature of war itself - bad stuff happens. Ever hear of Sherman's march? By his reasoning, DePalma thinks that because some soldiers raped and murdered civillians, we should have just let the south win and condemned the union army.
This moderate, meaning me - (pro-choice, anti-censorship, anti-death penalty, etc.) is convinced that DePalma, and many on the anti-war fringe, HATE our soldiers and see them ALL as nothing more than potential rapists and murderers.
I may be wrong, but this is in fact, the impression I get. If it's not the impression I'm supposed to have, then here's a suggestion -
STOP DOING DAMAGE TO YOUR OWN CAUSE BY DEMONIZING OUR TROOPS, PATRONIZING OUR ALLIES AND EMBOLDENING THE ENEMY. GIVE OUR BRAVE MEN AND WOMEN A CHANCE TO WIN, GIVE THE IRAQI'S A CHANCE FOR FREEDOM.
If the fringe can't see that the tide has now turned in Iraq, then they are truly blinded by ANTI-MILLITARY ideology. (Notice I didn't say Anti-War, these folks are flat out anti-soldier period.)
Meanwhile, Depalma and his ilk are cranking out anti-war/anti-troop Hollywood movies that are not surprisingly bombing. Millions of dollars to get shove anti-millitary dogma into our faces. "Lions for Lambs" is the next slap in the face, due out next week - that is overflowing with talent behind the scenes. Redford, Streep and Cruise head an all-star production. The story line will probably scream '" WE HATE OUR TROOPS." And it will bomb.
Hollywood needs to wake up. It's 2007, not 1967. This generation ain't playing that shit.
So congressman Pete Stark 2 weeks ago had these lovely remarks about our President and our troops.
"Republicans sure don't care about finding $200 billion to fight the illegal war in Iraq. Where are you going to get that money? Are you going to tell us lies like you're telling us today? Is that how you're going to fund the war? You don't have money to fund the war or children. But you're going to spend it to blow up innocent people if he can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the President's amusement."
Even House Speaker Pelosi had the decency to call him out on this at the end; reminding congress members to refrain from personal attacks on the president. My respect for her grew a bit as she chastised the clearly insane congressman. (Though we all know that deep down George W. Bush HATES children and delights in our soldiers being decapitated by explosives.)
I suppose I'm naive for wanting everyone on the same page, for all of us to just accept certain things. The president and our troops deserve respect. The 9/11 hijackings were not perpetrated by our government. I must be out of my mind.
Eventually Stark apologized, and seemed genuinely remorseful for his remarks. Fine, we all say stupid things, apology accepted. But what bothers me about his remarks most, is that I suspect deep down - that not only do some people not like that our troops are in Iraq, they simply just don't like our troops.
Case in point, "Redacted" is a movie that's out, directed by Brian DePalma, that details the true life story of marines in Iraq who raped and murdered a young girl and killed her family as well. Horrible stuff that should certainly be held up to the light of truth, exposed for everyone to see and the perpetrators brought to justice.
In fact. this is a story that has been covered by most media outlets; and the soldiers involved are all likely to spend the rest of their lives in prison - and may even face the death penalty thanks not to the diligence of the anti-war crowd, but the military itself which brought the story to light in the first place and has been exemplary in providing both a vigorous investigation and prosecution of the monsters that did this.
But DePalma wants to take it further; it isn't enough to point out a few bad apples. His movie and his mindset are pointedly directed at proving that fundamentally, the military is predisposed to this behavior. And our unjust and illegal war is making monsters out of our men.
Of the systematic and mass torture, rape and murder that went on under Sadaam Hussein for a quarter of a century - he remains mum.
Of the mutilations of our soldiers, and the mass killings of Muslims by al qaeda over the last five years - DePalma has nothing to say.
He has to make a movie, graphically detailing the very worst thing a soldier could do - and hold it up as what is representative of our military as a whole. Let's not kid ourselves, this is what he's doing.
No mention of the lives our troops have saved, of the infrastructure they are helping rebuild. The recent success of the surge, the flat out crippling of al qaeda.
He can't even put together a thoughtful look at the many legitimate arguments against the war. He has to sensationalize and brutalize - both the victims of the crime and the US military at large.
He is also ignorant of history and the nature of war itself - bad stuff happens. Ever hear of Sherman's march? By his reasoning, DePalma thinks that because some soldiers raped and murdered civillians, we should have just let the south win and condemned the union army.
This moderate, meaning me - (pro-choice, anti-censorship, anti-death penalty, etc.) is convinced that DePalma, and many on the anti-war fringe, HATE our soldiers and see them ALL as nothing more than potential rapists and murderers.
I may be wrong, but this is in fact, the impression I get. If it's not the impression I'm supposed to have, then here's a suggestion -
STOP DOING DAMAGE TO YOUR OWN CAUSE BY DEMONIZING OUR TROOPS, PATRONIZING OUR ALLIES AND EMBOLDENING THE ENEMY. GIVE OUR BRAVE MEN AND WOMEN A CHANCE TO WIN, GIVE THE IRAQI'S A CHANCE FOR FREEDOM.
If the fringe can't see that the tide has now turned in Iraq, then they are truly blinded by ANTI-MILLITARY ideology. (Notice I didn't say Anti-War, these folks are flat out anti-soldier period.)
Meanwhile, Depalma and his ilk are cranking out anti-war/anti-troop Hollywood movies that are not surprisingly bombing. Millions of dollars to get shove anti-millitary dogma into our faces. "Lions for Lambs" is the next slap in the face, due out next week - that is overflowing with talent behind the scenes. Redford, Streep and Cruise head an all-star production. The story line will probably scream '" WE HATE OUR TROOPS." And it will bomb.
Hollywood needs to wake up. It's 2007, not 1967. This generation ain't playing that shit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)