jump to navigation

I think it is wholly appropriate 8 September 2008

Posted by marisacat in Culture of Death, DC Politics, Inconvenient Voice of the Voter, Lie Down Fall Down Dems, WAR!.
trackback

z

Opium poppy fields near Jalalabad Afghanistan [expatmonkey]

.. we are the biggest drug dealer on earth. Oh they can spin the truth of the annual harvest from the poppy fields of Afghanistan any way they like. Production soared and with us, for the first time, came large scale refinement of the poppy product in-country. The NYT quite blandly reported, a few months following our invasion of Afghanistan, that a refinement site was now located near the old Soviet installation at Bagram.

Just as blandly, the NYT reported soon after our invasion of Iraq that we had “greatly increased our footprint in the Horn of Africa”.

All of this part and parcel of the never to end Global War on Terror. Three years ago as those poppy fields were supplying well over 90% of the global distribution, reported by the UN, the information was in all the press – across Europe and the UK – but scarcely at all here.

Might as well face the future from a well tended poppy garden. Makes as much sense as anything…

It seems that Salome resonates.

Advertisements

Comments»

1. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

From the article NYCO linked to in the last thread: an organization of Republican women in Fla. call Palin’s advent “the greatest political moment in the history of women since suffrage”.

In the meantime, Democrats and “progressives” try to claim that sexism isn’t really a problem in their criticisms of Palin. Or maybe it was initially, what with the pregnancy rumors etc., but it’s not anymore. Because now they’re just criticizing how incompetent and out-of-touch she is, even though she’s been a mayor and a governor.

Which rhetoric do you think sounds better? Which rhetoric is the average American voter more likely to be swayed by?

2. marisacat - 8 September 2008

Juicy bit, if unsurprising bit, from the Woodward book (via Politico email)

– The Pentagon’s April announcement of new roles for Gen. David H. Petraeus and Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno was designed to ‘lock in the current strategy’ in Iraq even if a Democrat became president, Woodward writes. Petraeus is to be the next U.S. central command commander, and Odierno is to succeed him as Multinational Force Iraq commander. The handoff is to occur Sept. 16, it was announced this weekend.

Retired Army General Jack Keane [an architect of the “surge” — Mcat], formerly the number two man in the U.S. Army (vice chief of staff), told Woodward:

‘Let’s be frank about what’s happening here. We are going to have a new administration. Do we want these policies continued or not? Do we want the best guys in there who were involved in these policies, who were advocates for them? Let’s assume we have a Democratic administration and they want to pull this thing out quickly, and now they have to deal with General Petraeus and General Odierno. There will be a price to be paid to override them.’ (photos p. 31; p. 415)

3. marisacat - 8 September 2008

The Democrats needed to be much much smarter about the Palin entry. Rather than standing between her legs, her daughter’s legs and scraping for amniotic fluid and whatever else.

Everything I see and have seen for 10 days, screams panic on the part of the Democrats.

4. liberalcatnip - 8 September 2008

In other news, it’s my birthday. Cheesecake at my place! Check out the video. 😉

5. wilfred - 8 September 2008

“Happy Birthday to ya, Happy Birthday to ya, Happy Birthday!!!!”

Are you doing anything fun to celebrate, LC?

6. wilfred - 8 September 2008

Everything I see and have seen for 10 days, screams panic on the part of the Democrats.

Agreed, the mere thought of 4 more years of Necon/Fundie rule is sending 50% of the electorate into hyperventilation.

But you know my old mantra, without the media doing their job the country will swing to the right automatically as we’re just a nation of sheep with the government and corporations shepherding the masses.

7. wilfred - 8 September 2008

oops, missed those italics, and by a mile!
i’m such a techie 🙂

8. marisacat - 8 September 2008

hmm February interview with SP, with Steve Scully of Cspan… Three You Tube screens. Gah.

9. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

3. Well, what truly pisses me off is that Democrats have had almost 40 years to come up with their own appealing photogenic suburban-mom Everywoman candidate for national office, and they have failed miserably.

The best they could do was Hillary? Really?

Because they couldn’t be bothered to give a rat’s ass about a woman candidate, because in their minds such a candidate would only appeal to the hairy-legged “womens’ studies types”.

And now, I’m sure, they’re all going crazy calling and emailing each other, having frantic meetings – “We gotta get a Palin!”

They are forever reacting, not acting. The closing the barn door after the horse is gone thing.

10. marisacat - 8 September 2008

FWIW a cataloging of Palin rumors. It’s Pajamas Media, but [shrugs shoulders] the Democrats have little cred left either.

11. liberalcatnip - 8 September 2008

Are you doing anything fun to celebrate, LC?

Nothing exciting planned but the day is young (unlike me). 😉

12. marisacat - 8 September 2008

9

oh very true, but what people missed year after year, post ’84, was that the Democrats had no interest in nominating to either part of the ticket a woman, much less a black. There has been no fostering of deep bench within the party, at all. The women senators — well the whole thing to my eye is rather grudging on the part of the party. Which is NOT to say the R are some stellar org. IMO Both parties are bankrupt, but the R def shook up the valley and canyon walls with this one. Several of us suggested John Lewis in 04 as a possible VP (and what an unmasking of him, this season, whew, when legends die they DIE) and were shouted down. Too risky.

Oh yeah electing Ob was so gonna heal us. Don’t make me laugh.

13. marisacat - 8 September 2008

11

Happy Birthday!! have a second serving of cheescake… 😉

14. liberalcatnip - 8 September 2008

13. Thanks, I will! I’m actually going to make myself one of those no-bake cheesecakes later. Mmmm…cheesecake. For as much as I talk about it, I really don’t have it that often.

15. NYCO - 8 September 2008

1. A “Republican feminist” is not an oxymoron. That seems to have taken the Dems completely by surprise. They thought they owned feminism – in any and all of its forms! (They also forgot the adage, “The female of the species is deadlier than the male.”)

While I certainly don’t share Palin’s political views, how can you not be interested in this spectacle, after watching the Dems so thoroughly trash their own distaff activists? The GOP doesn’t have to win Dem women over with Palin. They just have to further sap their enthusiasm for the Democratic Party.

And left-leaning women will continue to fight their battles underground. But it isn’t as if the right isn’t exposing its own flank by making this risky move. They may lose as many women as they gain.

16. wilfred - 8 September 2008

#14. See you are doing something to celebrate! And blow out a candle, it’s a fun ritual.

17. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

16 it’s a fun ritual.

Yeah, like mocking feminists.

18. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

15 NYCO: A “Republican feminist” is not an oxymoron.

No, it’s not. And many of them are even pro-choice. That’s more than I can say for some Democrats.

19. marisacat - 8 September 2008

well the reality is that the Democratic and other related types, male and leadership, thought they had the women under control. Oops no.

20. NYCO - 8 September 2008

I’m continually amazed at how the Dems keep alienating all the Stans. By “stans” I mean those huge blocs of helpless, scared/hunted voters who they want to “help” but who they keep ceding to the GOP over and over again. First, there’s Oldistan, which used to be theirs. (The term “Oldistan” is actually being used – yeah, that really inspires trust and reverence of the Dems!) Then there’s Femistan, which also used to be theirs. Blackistan will be next to be blamed (particularly if Obama loses or is a one-termer). Soon we will be left with a quivering core of angry young elite-wannabe males, not a good thing, because quivering young elite-wannabe males tend to start really nasty radical groups that don’t accomplish anything.

And then the Democratic Party will have quietly vanished. And everyone will understand that there never really was any great “Red-Blue” battle at all. It was all downhill every step of the way.

21. marisacat - 8 September 2008

Soon we will be left with a quivering core of angry young elite-wannabe males, not a good thing, because quivering young elite-wannabe males tend to start really nasty radical groups that don’t accomplish anything.

Is that ever the truth, as in what will be left … and what might be a reality of that…

Oh the waves of hatred by the young tech programmer, LSAT and similar types who are overwhelming online, hatred for anyone but themselves was obvious years ago.

22. marisacat - 8 September 2008

Ronn Owen on KGO is shocked, waves of callers saying, ”lay off her. Let’s see what she can do”. What a hoot!

RO was fine with Biden and says he would have been fine with McC if he had picked Lieberman. You gotta wonder… what a laugh it all is.

23. wilfred - 8 September 2008

#17 LOL Heather, if only you were a comedian. I love your math. Disagree with one person (who self-identifies feminist) and you disagree with all feminists (when you are a feminist yourself!). And even rudely enter a thread wishing someone a Happy Birthday to throw nasty untruths.

It reminds me of when Fleet Admiral and his minions tried to spread the nasty rumor at Dkos years ago that I was a Republican because i was giving the Party Dems such a hard time! The mind reels.

I have a long reputation on Dkos, LSF, and Mcat with nothing but evidence to the contrary. Something tells me you need enemies. Count me out, unless you’re being vicious like that disgusting insinuation, I’m just going to ignore you (even when your facts are wrong, let others correct you).

24. wilfred - 8 September 2008

A question to NYCO, Marisa etal to clarify, as i’m understandably curious.

Do you consider the women who are members of “Feminists for Life” to be feminists? I understand that there are Republican women who are pro-choice and you might agree they are feminists. But what is your opinion on this?

And I’m not trying in any way to be provocative, i’m genuinely interested as to how this is viewed.

25. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

23. Of course I’m rude. At times it’s necessary.

Anyone who thinks it’s OK to lob sexist insults and slurs at Palin is not a true feminist – merely a brainwashed tool. Spare me the pompous flatulence about your “reputation”.

I’m just going to ignore you

You said that a while back.

26. marisacat - 8 September 2008

I don’t subscribe to the word “feminist” jsut never have.

I do know one thing. The old line Dem so called feminist and womens’ rights and abortion rights groups are useless, adn thus nto serving women, but serving THE PARTY. So if “Feminists for Life” serves a winger agenda, the Dem orgs are doing no better.

And I will say again, I learned of the slash of funds for subsidised birth control in the last budget bill not from the Dem orgs that email me, NOW, NARAL etc but from Kathryn Jean Lopez at The Corner. B ecasue the orgs are nto for woemn, they are for the party.

And Emily’s List is emailing me and dropping letters and whatever else madly. They too are useless. All they want to do is fundraise

So it hardly matters to extract “Feminists for Life” as an issue.

27. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

Personally, I think feminists have to be pro-choice – reproductive freedom is essential to women’s rights. However I can see how other women can believe in feminist principles and still be anti-abortion. Being against abortion doesn’t always mean you believe that women are inferior to men and must stay at home with the kids. Often, yes, but not always.

The problem is that there are still vestiges of medieval “morality” hanging around in many people’s brains because of their upbringing. While they may embrace enlightened views in some ways, they are stuck in the Dark Ages on others.

Also, FWIW, there are people who are staunch feminists who object to abortion on moral grounds and speak out against it, BUT they don’t try to make it illegal. One Buddhist friend of mine has this view.

28. wilfred - 8 September 2008

Anyone who thinks it’s OK to lob sexist insults and slurs at Palin is not a true feminist

Please find a sentence of me saying that it’s ok to lob sexist insults at Palin or ANY woman, EVER. You can not find one because it’s patently untrue.

So now you’re a rude liar. A run of the mill liar Heather. I will comment about your untruths where i’m concerned. I loathe bullies and you Heather are quite a nasty one and I’ve fought a lot worse ones than you. You’ve got a totally misguided idea in your head and your charging full steam with no facts at your side.

29. wilfred - 8 September 2008

LOL, and jumping into someone’s birthday wish isn’t just rude, it’s trolling.

30. NYCO - 8 September 2008

24. Abortion simply isn’t the only issue of concern to women. Yes, you can be “feminist” and take a different line on some of these issues. “Republican feminism” is, IMHO, “feminism for Republicans” – not “Republicans for feminism.” 🙂

31. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

28 – as I just said in the other thread: you think it’s totally OK to mock Palin as a “beauty queen”, and you denigrate anyone who objects to sexist insults of Palin as a paranoid “commies under the bed” wacko. You actually repeated the “Commies Commies Everywhere” statement a few times. I’ve already cited the comments of yours to which I object.

If that’s not what you meant to say, if you typed in haste and are regretting at leisure, then feel free to retract those statements. But that’s what you said.

Calling me a “liar” isn’t helping your position.

32. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

29 – “troll” is the intellectual coward’s word for someone who brings up a subject he finds threatening.

33. marisacat - 8 September 2008

BTW GMA today had on 4 out of 6 of SP closest women friends. I assume there is a vid at ABC site. IT was really interesting. 3 were talkative, one was not.

But 2 of the 3 who did speak up, are pro choice they said. 2 of the 4 said they are personally undecided for the Nov vote, one is for McC/P and one said she never divulges her vote at all.

34. wilfred - 8 September 2008

as I just said in the other thread: you think it’s totally OK to mock Palin as a “beauty queen”

No. No. No. That’s a lie, yet again.
You were slamming a woman who said she was a beauty queen a few threads ago saying it wasn’t true. I stepped in only to say yes she was a beauty queen as it is factual. I offered ZERO opinion about anything else in regards to her being a beauty queen as i could not care less about it as it tells me little or nothing about her as a candidate.

I was in essence in that first thread saying “get your facts straight Heather” in a nice way and shock of shocks, that’s still what i’m saying. I sense a pattern here, you don’t get your facts straight and you don’t care who you malign in the process.

You cannot spout untruths and not be called a liar. Own it Heather and you’re repeating them so it’s heading toward habitual liar.

35. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

34

You were slamming a woman who said she was a beauty queen a few threads ago saying it wasn’t true. I stepped in only to say yes she was a beauty queen as it is factual.

No, you are the one who needs to get the facts straight. I said it was a STUPID comment. Stupid. That is not the same as “untrue”. You then came into the discussion to defend the comment by claiming that everything in the comment was factual, the clear implication being that I was wrong to criticize it.

Palin may indeed have been a “beauty queen”, I have never disputed that. But bringing that up to MOCK her is STUPID. Why? Because it’s SEXIST.

And now in the most recent discussion, you have repeatedly ridiculed those who criticize this sexist treatment, comparing them to paranoid conservatives screaming about the Red Menace.

That isn’t acceptable either.

Getting it yet?

36. liberalcatnip - 8 September 2008

17. Okay…so blowing out birthday candles is like mocking feminists. Alrighty then. Umm. Hmm.

37. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

wilfred, here are the relevant comments, to refresh your memory:

27. Heather-Rose Ryan – 5 September 2008
26 – Steinem’s essay was a piece of trash – partisan political hackery. Oh right, Obama and Biden are big supporters of stay-at-home dads.

Palin is bugfuck crazy and scary, a book banning snake handling Rapture beauty queen who could get real close to the nooklyur button. Fail.

Sorry, but that’s just stupid. It’s exactly like the wingnuts raving about Hillary being a Communist lesbian who has her enemies killed. I mean, come on. Ooga Booga.

29. wilfred – 5 September 2008
#27. Palin is:

A) a supporter of book banning
B) a Rapture believing Fundamentalist
C) a former beauty queen.
D) not qualified to be anywhere near the world’s largest nuclear arsenal.

Sorry, but that’s not “stupid” HRH, and it’s not factually incorrect. Whether you cared for the way it was stated is another matter. That statement you blockquoted was far more accurate than the Hillary slime you referred to.

34. Heather-Rose Ryan – 5 September 2008
wilfred:

A. this is factually incorrect – there is no evidence that Palin ever attempted to ban or censor any books, or intends to try to do so in the future.

B. I don’t care for her religion but then I don’t care for Obama’s either.

C. There is the obligatory sexist content that must be included in all criticisms of Palin.

D. Well who is, really? Is Obama?

So yeah, sorry to say – that was a stupid comment.

I’m sure there’s plenty to dislike and decry about Palin, but the truth is, at this point we know very little about her or her ideas – most of the frenzy about her is reflective of people’s prejudices rather than any actual fact. And the nastiness that’s coming out reveals a lot about those people.

Sullivan, for one, is freaking out the window, almost as bad as the rabid droolers on DKos.

So where, exactly, have I lied? Looks to me like you are the one who has misrepresented the facts.

38. wilfred - 8 September 2008

Sorry, but that’s just stupid. It’s exactly like the wingnuts raving about Hillary being a Communist lesbian who has her enemies killed.

You slammed her statement as stupid and immediately compared it to untruths. The clear assumption is that she was lying or unfactual. You smash others with a wide net Heather. I told you immediately in that comment that her statement was more factual than your comparison, which it is because those things about Hillary were LIES, alluding that hers were no more truthful which was wrong. I bristled that you called her stupid, you of all people have little room to cast stones so viciously.

I then immediately commented that ‘whether you cared for the way it was said is another matter’ which was reaching out to you so you wouldn’t think i was bullying you. The way you throw invectives around, calling others here stupid and telling people “Fuck you” repeatedly is a bore and indicative of your total lack of grace or style in your comments. It also shows reaching out to you in any way is to get your hand bitten, obviously. Some bulls see red no matter what color is in front of them.

By the way others here jumped in to tell you that you were factually wrong on the librarian issue. Funny how the phrase FACTUALLY WRONG keeps coming up. You want to toss your shit around and don’t want to have to fact check yourself.

Your lie was that I support attacks against Palin based on sexism, that anything about her womanhood is the problem with her. I haven’t and i don’t. In fact I bristed that you called the woman commenter ‘stupid’ and then imply that she’s lying or stating untruths, you really are a bully and a nasty one too.

39. marisacat - 8 September 2008

LOL First Read:

*** Where did you go, Joe? Lost in all the Palin celebrity is Joe Biden. Talk about a candidate who has lost his voice — the guy who was hired primarily to be one of the McCain attack dogs seems to have been muted. Biden is trying to find his voice and because every question he gets is about Palin, he doesn’t seem prepared to handle his McCain duties. Yesterday on Meet the Press, he had to spend way too much time talking about Palin, and that for now is time wasted for the Obama campaign.

40. wilfred - 8 September 2008

Sullivan, for one, is freaking out the window, almost as bad as the rabid droolers on DKos

Just for fun, here is how i would respond if i was writing as I perceive you do:

“How dare you criticize Sullivan. All criticism of him is homophobic. You must hate gay people as I’m so tired of all the homophobic criticism of Sullivan. Heather is a homophobe. Fuck You.”
———————
Heather, you are, i trust not a homophobe anymore than i am a Sexist Palin hater. This has gone on way too long and is i’m sure boring the pants off of everyone else here.

41. wilfred - 8 September 2008

#39 but, but, but Joementum 2 is suposed to be the great debater! He’s going to save us on talk shows and be Obamarama’s attack dog!

As i’ve been saying since January, it’s going to be the scariest and slimiest year ever politically.

42. marisacat - 8 September 2008

Sully’s knocking himself out. It’s pretty funny to watch, as it happens.

43. marisacat - 8 September 2008

Biden is a replay of Lieberman. Which should tell people something about the congress.

44. liberalcatnip - 8 September 2008

40. i’m sure boring the pants off of everyone else here.

Don’t stop on my account. I’m just trying to figure out if I should eat my birthday candles instead.

45. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

My local Democratic Committee just sent out an email with some administrative stuff and the full text of the Anne Kilkenny email. I wrote back to them and told them that I object to their passing that around – it is unsubstantiated personal opinion and smacks of gossip and character assassination. As such it doesn’t differ much from the Swiftboater attacks on Kerry. I advised them to stick to criticisms of her politics and policies and stay away from the gossipmongering.

38 – it’s a lie that Hillary is a lesbian? Who knows for sure? I hear lots of rumors about it. Fine with me if she is – I’m a big admirer of lesbians.

But my point was that the commenter’s Ooga Booga-ing was, like the wingnuts’ characterization of Hillary, a repulsive combination of hyperbole, rumors and sexism.

You don’t seem to get the idea that using “beauty queen” as an insult is the same as using “lesbian” as an insult.

By the way others here jumped in to tell you that you were factually wrong on the librarian issue.

No, I wasn’t factually wrong. I’ve been following the “librarian issue” quite closely and there has been no new information since I last posted about it.

The “banned books list” is, as far as I can ascertain, a fake.

46. lucid - 8 September 2008

Happy b-day catnip…

47. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

40 – there are a LOT of misogynist gay men*, and Sullivan is one of them. It makes my skin crawl, when I’m not laughing my ass off at him.

*perhaps you haven’t heard, wilfred.

48. liberalcatnip - 8 September 2008

Thanks, lucid. 🙂

49. mattes - 8 September 2008

#14….worth another Birthday, just for the cheesecake. Enjoy.

….I think I am a misogynist sexist. Really, can I still post here. I think there is a significant difference between a mother and father. And that a mother has greater obligations. It’s a values thing to me. Colors all I see…

I do believe in equal opportunities and pay. But once a mother, motherhood first, at least till the child can fend for themselves. Call me sexist.

50. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

By the way, wilfred, today you’ve called me a “liar” several times, insulted my writing ability, implied that I’m not very smart, and accused me of being a “troll” and a “fanatic”.

Thanks for bringing a little bit of Daily Kos to Marisa’s blog! It makes me so nostalgic. Too bad you can’t downrate my comments, that would make the idyll complete 🙂

51. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

49, mattes: OK, you’re a sexist.

I don’t know about the misogyny – you really have to have an animus toward women to be be misogynist. So for example, if you attacked a woman as a “selfish bitch” because she went back to work after giving birth instead of being the full-time caregiver, that would be misogyny. If you just said “tsk tsk” it would be mere sexism.

I hope that helps!

52. mattes - 8 September 2008

When I was working for a fortune 100 company as a manager, I held little respect for other women managers that would feel proud of popping out kids and then be back at work 8-10 hours a days. I did not “hate” them, I felt sorry for their kids. Especially since working was a choice for them. I always thought if I had children, I could never leave them like that. Being the oldest of 5 and having lost my mother at 15 colors my beliefs. The youngest she left was 2. She was not a working mother and her loss traumitize all of us, I believe for life.

I am a sexist.

There is something about a loving mother that has no substitute.

53. lucid - 8 September 2008

You don’t seem to get the idea that using “beauty queen” as an insult is the same as using “lesbian” as an insult.

I’m going to go out on a limb here… Actually, I disagree. Using “beauty queen” as an insult applies to a specific stereotype that those involved in the fashion indsutry as a whole [both men and women equally] are not exactly possessed of a scintillating intellect. It can be read as a non-gendered insult [equivalent to ‘he was a model’]. The latter, however, draws only on gendered stereotypes and sexual preference stereotypes. To me they are very different insults – the former somewhat petty and meaningless, the latter actually bigoted.

Of course, as with any discussion of language use, determining meaning depends so much on intent, context and reception.

54. mattes - 8 September 2008

Oh, one more thing I forgot to comment on. I try to never call women bitches. There is something in that term that is beyond demeaning. But yes, when a woman places career before mothering her “young” children, I do think it’s selfish. It’s not like we have the cushion of an extended family to nurture the child, and I don’t believe in strangers raising the young, which is the trauma of some of the very rich…..and the very poor.

Although my family was not very rich, my mother was raised by nannies and boarding schools. She held it against her mother forever, and then got pregnant with me at a very early age.

55. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

53 – sorry lucid, using “beauty queen” as an insult is sexist because the term refers to beauty pageants, which, historically, have centered exclusively on women, and on their looks as opposed to their intellect. That’s the ultimate gendered stereotype. Here, the slam is code for “she won a beauty contest, therefore she must be stupid”.

The wingnut attack on Hillary as a “lesbian” isn’t about her actual sexual preference – it’s code for “she’s bossy, therefore she’s not feminine enough”.

To me, both are equally offensive sexist slurs.

56. liberalcatnip - 8 September 2008

Okay. Now I’m bored. CONGA LINE! Who’s with me??

57. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

54 But yes, when a woman places career before mothering her “young” children, I do think it’s selfish. It’s not like we have the cushion of an extended family to nurture the child, and I don’t believe in strangers raising the young

OK but your belief about “who should raise the family” isn’t universally shared, and besides, the “career/mothering” choice isn’t “either/or” – it’s a balance.

And I strenuously object to the idea that a woman wanting to prioritize a career at certain times in her life is “selfish”. Women were put on earth for much more than just procreating.

58. mattes - 8 September 2008

Never ending MAD conga line:

Meanwhile:

Russia: Preparation for launch of Iran nuclear plant in final stage

The Russian state-run company building Iran’s first nuclear plant said Monday that preparations for the reactor’s launch had entered their final stage.

The director of the state-run Atomstroiexport company, Leonid Reznikov, said that by the end of the year, the company will have taken steps that will make the launch of the Bushehr plant irreversible.

Company spokeswoman Irina Yesipova said the launch date will be determined after talks between Russian and Iranian nuclear officials this month.

Iranian officials have said that Bushehr would be launched this fall.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1019225.html

45-nation group OKs landmark US-India nuke deal

The U.S. gained key international backing Saturday for a bitterly contested plan to sell peaceful nuclear technology to India — a South Asia powerhouse that has tested atomic weapons but has refused to sign global nonproliferation accords.

Washington said the landmark deal, which still needs U.S. congressional approval, will place India’s nuclear program under closer scrutiny. But detractors warned it could set a dangerous precedent in efforts to rid the world of weapons of mass destruction.

“By establishing a ‘good guys’ and ‘bad guys’ set of rules, the decision will make it far harder to curb the South Asian nuclear and missile arms race,” said Daryl Kimball, who heads the Washington-based Arms Control Association. Kimball said the deal could undermine efforts to contain the Iranians and North Koreans.

Saturday’s approval by the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group dealt “a profound setback to the nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament system that will produce dangerous ripple effects for years to come,” he said.

The group, which governs the legal world trade in nuclear components and know-how, signed off on the deal after three days of contentious talks in Vienna and some concessions to countries insistent on holding India to its promises not to touch off a new nuclear arms race.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080906/ap_on_re_as/nuclear_india

Hiroshima, Nagasaki chiefs regret nuke trade waiver for India

Hiroshima Mayor Tadatoshi Akiba and Nagasaki Governor Genjiro Kaneko expressed their disappointment today with India getting the N.S.G. waiver.

In a statement, Akiba said it is “totally disappointing” that a unanimous decision was made by countries responsible for the future of human beings.

The 45-member Nuclear Suppliers Group (N.S.G.) reached consensus Saturday to give India a nuclear trade waiver for its bilateral nuclear cooperation deal with the United States.

With the N.S.G. decision, India, which is not party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, is allowed to start trading nuclear technology for civil nuclear programs with N.S.G. member states.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/PoliticsNation/Hiroshima_Nagasaki_chiefs_regret_nuke_trade_waiver_for_India_/articleshow/3456030.cms

Life goes on.

59. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

56 – Oh sorry, catnip – Happy Birthday!

Here’s some group dance action for you.

60. mattes - 8 September 2008

“who should raise the family” isn’t universally shared

That’s obviously. But I am entitled to my own conclusions on motherhood and what it means.

it’s a balance.

I believe that balance ends up hurting the child. If a women does not want to “mother”, in this day and age she does not have to (birthcontrol/adoption/abortion). It goes without saying, cruel or bad mothers, should not be mothers at all. Goes for fathers. (no, I don’t think there are not perfect parents)….but:

I’d rather be raised by loving mother who did not work outside the home, then be born into a privileged family and be raised by a progression of strangers. Ask any child. I do not put the basic needs of the mother before a dependent child. There is a reason many mothers claim guilt to be working outside the home.

Obviously this should not be ledgislated, but it can be a norm, and has been in many culures.

Women were put on earth for much more than just procreating.

“put on earth” begs the question, who put us here and why. And I agree we have a choice, and should have a choice, medical technology has given us one. My only issue is that once a woman chooses motherhood, I have strong opinions on what responsiblities should come with that choice. Raising children is one of the most important parts of a culture…society.

…by your children a culture should be judged, stealing a bit from Lincoln.

61. cad - 8 September 2008

“using “beauty queen” as an insult is the same as using “lesbian” as an insult. ”

As the owner of debated comment, I call “bullshit” on this.

“Beauty queen” refers to her celebrity status, the likes of which we have been told only belong to the Big O. And I would garner that since a lot of beauty pageants tend to be propagated by men, that her intro to the GOP crowd is akin to that level of image and insight. I say Palin reinforces the “stand behind your man” sexism of the right. I say a woman who would try to make abortion illegal in case of rape is sexist beyond belief.

62. NYCO - 8 September 2008

Frankly, I’ve sometimes wondered if the agriculturally-based conception of “the family unit” is part of the problem.

Some Native American peoples did not live in nuclear family units or even groupings of such — AND, did not cohabit year-round with the opposite sex. Women lived in villages and farmed, clans were matriarchal, the large family dwellings “belonged” to the woman-headed clans; the men hunted, traded, made war, and would come and go. Divorces were simple affairs and could (and usually were) initiated by the woman. Since the men didn’t own “property,” marriages weren’t based on women and dowries. War decisions were finalized only with the assent of clan mothers.

Women and men don’t HAVE to live together year-round. It’s not written in the stars.

As for choosing to have kids, my sister and I don’t have kids and I tend to see this as a pro-kid choice we’ve made. I don’t think we’ve been confident about the availability of guys who’ll really stick around to help with any kids, and a lack of other strong (female) support. That has perhaps come out as a disinterest in pursuing motherhood. I know I personally feel that if you’re gonna do it, you’d better think hard about the availability of a support system. Because once you make the decision, it’s not about you any more.

Many working mothers have ample support from financially and/or emotionally secure relatives who aren’t necessarily their husbands. Judge the support system — not the individual mom. A teen mother in one culture isn’t necessarily the same as a teen mother in another culture, for example.

63. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

59, mattes – you are of course free to have your own opinions but

I do not put the basic needs of the mother before a dependent child.

I would guess that’s what the religious-wacko husband of Andrea Yates thought. Surely you remember – she didn’t take a shower for a month or more, and nobody in her “family circle” thought to care about that.

60, cad: “Beauty queen” refers to her celebrity status, the likes of which we have been told only belong to the Big O.

Um, no, it is a sexist insult, referring to her having once been a “beauty queen” and implying that this is all she is.

I say Palin reinforces the “stand behind your man” sexism of the right. I say a woman who would try to make abortion illegal in case of rape is sexist beyond belief.

Well, that is possible. All I know for sure is that “progressives” who attack women because of their beauty and because of their femaleness are world-class sexists, as dangerous than any rightwingnut.

64. baypraire - 8 September 2008

all i know for sure is that palin is promoted as a maverick, a fighter against the old boy’s networks and the corrupt politicians and supposedly stands against “business as usual”. but she has no problem turning control of women’s private reproductive decisions over to regulatory legislation by these same groups of men.

so if she floats, or sinks, i could really care less.

65. cad - 8 September 2008

“that “progressives” who attack women because of their beauty”

Palin is no beauty queen. I find her revolting. Ugly ideas begat ugly personalities.

66. cad - 8 September 2008

And I would counter that some feminists would disagree that being critical of “beauty queens” equates to sexism. Quite the opposite.

67. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

63 – Palin is no beauty queen. I find her revolting.

Well, the concept was apparently foremost in your mind, since you drew on it to insult her.

Can we now conclude that your attack on her was stupid and move on?

68. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

64 – being critical of the idea of beauty pageants is quite different from using “beauty queen” as an insult.

Face it, cad, you’ve lost.

69. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

62, bay: as yet it’s unclear what Palin wants to push in terms of legislation. “Progressives” have been too busy calling her a bitch, a cunt and an unfit mother to spend much time analyzing her political positions.

70. mattes - 8 September 2008

Heather….you use a mentally ill person as your example? Of why women should not be obligated to raise the children they bear? Maybe this woman did not want children but did not have the freedom of abortions/adoptions/birthcontrol, or an extended family and community to support her. Many at home woman are more isolated because so many of them are working. And with our mobile society most people don’t have family members that live close by and are available for support.

I produced a video for a non-profit called the Parent Project in the 1980’s. It was a program sold to corporations targeting working mothers. Helping them deal with parenting skills and all the problems associated with working mothers. And believe me….they had plenty. The corporation came first, it was an unwritten dictim that for every job at this corportion, there were ten people behind you wanting your job. What suffered where the children. This program was sold as a way to help parents deal with family problems more effectively SO THEY COULD BE MORE PRODUCTIVE AT WORK.

I heard the horror stories of many working women.

This is not the non-profit I worked with but a similar one:
http://www.parentproject.com/ The problems of children have just increased since the 1980s.

Computers, TV and babysitters do not make good parents.

71. mattes - 8 September 2008

BTY, said corporation now has onsite daycare. BUT be aware this corportion is fortune 100 with plenty of money, recession proof. Most women don’t have this luxury.

And Palin’s family values is just one reason I would never support her. It just goes downhill from there.

And I also see the hypocrisy of the conservatives. Do as I say not as I do. Four years ago it was family first….now it’s country first, the hell with family values. I wonder how much choice the father of Bristol’s child had? Bet neither of them had much choice. Shotgun marriage values on display? They care about children getting born, but forget what comes after.

72. lucid - 8 September 2008

Heather – the only thing I find ‘apparent’ about this argument is that several people disagree with your reading of the ‘beauty queen’ line for different stated reasons. It’s not about ‘winning or losing’, as far as I’m concerned. It’s about having a conversation. And to be honest, what you said in response to me further reinforces the point I made about the non-gendered nature of the stereotype that ‘beauty and brains don’t mix’. Which, as a stereotype, I find both silly and obviously incorrect, but it is not an inherently sexist stereotype.

73. baypraire - 8 September 2008

62, bay: as yet it’s unclear what Palin wants to push in terms of legislation.

i have a passing familarity with palin’s statements regarding Alaska HB 301, the partial birth abortion ban, and HB 364, the alaska parental consent act. thanks to the efforts of a democrat in the alaskan senate both of those bills died in committee at the end of this last session, after passing the state house, and werent given to her to sign.

she publicly supported both bills, and would have signed both into law.

thats all the info i require to decide my position vis a vis ms palin.

74. Madman in the Marketplace - 8 September 2008

The GOP doesn’t have to win Dem women over with Palin. They just have to further sap their enthusiasm for the Democratic Party.

Yup. Drive down turnout for the donks from another reliable bloc. At the very least, a couple of percent down could negate a lot of gains w/ African Americans.

75. Madman in the Marketplace - 8 September 2008

Happy b-day, LC. Have a new hip to celebrate!

76. baypraire - 8 September 2008

yes! what 73 said.

77. CSTAR - 8 September 2008

#8 I saw the 3 Palin interview clips from February.. I thought she came across as a sensible, run-of-the-mill small town manager, running a (population-wise) small state, pretty much concerned with local issues. No whiff there of whacky creationism issues or other in that interview at least, which is not to say I doubt that the claims that she has them

Re # 64 beauty queens. I have a niece that was a beauty queen in Cali many years ago. She is now a practicing attorney. There is a lot of cultural conditioning involved, and I agree, that beauty contests may not be desirable paths for personal development for women. But really, what are you suggesting? If that’s what a women chooses, it’s not my decision.

78. marisacat - 8 September 2008

Sorry!

One each NYCO and mattes

out of moderation, they languished as I was asleep…

79. wilfred - 8 September 2008

#44 LOL, LC.
Are you eating the birthday candles because the cheesecake isn’t ready yet?

Just got in from a meeting and then saw the new Claude Miller film “Un Secret” with some friends. Wow, it was a tour de force about fascism in France in the 30’s (and a flash forward to the 80’s). If anyone gets the chance or is interested, very much worth the trip.

80. jam.fuse - 8 September 2008

happy burpday libcat

you are the by god cat´s meow

81. Madman in the Marketplace - 8 September 2008

I’m going to jump into this motherhood v. career thing … mainly b/c I’m an arrogant bastard who thinks people should care what I think.

What I think is … it depends.

“that’s no answer,” you might say.

But it is. It depends on the mother. It depends on the father. It depends on whether there is an extended network of family, friends & community involved to help nurture the child(ren) in question.

Mostly, it depends on the child, and you can’t know whether it is good or bad until that child looks back on herr life and sees her upbringing as a blessing or a curse.

I, for one, was a latchkey kid, from a very young age. It made me independent, able to solve problems for myself, cook for myself, take care of myself. My just-younger sister was too, and she had all kinds of problems as a teenager and young adult. Were my parents to be praised for us or damned?

I know people who had a special-needs sibling who were left neglected and damaged by the experience, and I’ve known other people in the same situation who were enriched by it. I’ve known people who were abused and who rose above it, and others who were crushed by it, and in NONE of those cases could you have predicted with anything remotely like certainty which was gonna be which.

We’re all like Pershian carpets … it’s the imperfections that make us beautiful or not, priceless or budget bin.

I hate these kinds of discussions in politics, because no matter which side the hammer comes down, the nanny state or the church state, you’re left with people unable to weave their own fates. No one can judge what is good for a child or children, for a family, but that family itself, and unless those children are physically or sexually being beaten, neglected or abused then, in a truly free society, we must …

STAY THE FUCK OUT OF IT.

If you say that SP is a “bad mother” for choosing to work, you’re saying that her husband’s love and support staying home isn’t good enough. You can’t really know if any of that is true. The kids will blossom or wither, and by the time that happens we’ll have forgotten they exist. It’s their choice.

Personally, I couldn’t stand to be part of a family like the Palins, and I have relatives who HAVE families like the Palins. I, personally, think that raising kids in that kind of religion is a form of abuse, BUT IT’S NOT MY FAMILY.

My problem with the right is they try to take away other families’ choices. Sadly, the “liberals” don’t fight for broadened choices for families, but rather use the threat of choice taken away as a fund-raising tool.

Meanwhile, real debate is side-lined by shouting matches and options & support for families and children disappear, which is what REAL abuse of children looks like.

82. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

72, lucid – you’re way off base. It’s Feminism 101 that women are judged based on their looks FAR more than men are, and pretty women are assumed to be bimbos. The same is NEVER true of men, although it’s becoming more socially acceptable to appreciate their looks. (as well it should be!) In any case, insulting a woman for being attractive or winning a beauty contest is as sexist as it gets.

As for the “beauty queen” thing, here’s the story:

She was at one time a beauty queen, Miss Wasilla 1984, in her hometown, population: 7,000 or so. “We were really surprised when she wanted to do it,” her father, Chuck, told the Vogue reporter. “That wasn’t her thing.” Basketball and hunting were more like it. Palin regretted the whole beauty pageant experience. “They made us line up in bathing suits and turn our backs so the male judges could look at our butts. I couldn’t believe it!” she told Vogue.

It’s silly when this stuff has been readily available in Newsweek and Vogue but people bashing Palin haven’t even seen it yet. Or they’ve seen it, and don’t want to believe it, for some reason.

Everyone who is opposed to Palin had better get with the program and understand what’s really going on here.

83. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

73, bay: excellent info, so how about everyone talk about that for a while instead of how FEMALE she is. Can we all agree on that, at least?

84. marisacat - 8 September 2008

A job for Biden. So why is Ob doing it? All kinds of people, high and low, have tried to tell Ob, leave her to Biden and surrogates, you cannot win attacking her. Arianna even did an editorial saying this…

Ben Smith posting:

Obama on Palin: ‘Mother, governor, moose shooter’

More from Parnes in Farmington Hills, MI:

Obama told the crowd that McCain and Palin spent most of the convention talking about their biographies.

Palin’s bio is “compelling,” Obama said.

The crowd booed. “No, it’s an interesting story.” More boos. “No, no, it is. I mean that sincerely. Mother, governor, moose shooter.”

The crowd broke out in laughter. “That’s cool. That’s cool. That’s cool stuff,” Obama said.

85. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

62, NYCO: interesting comment. I know I’ve thought a bit about Palin’s situation, how she can handle such a big family while running for office – she’s from a small town where she’s known everyone for years, and her parents are close by, to take over childcare when needed, and she has older children who are stepping in to care for the younger children.

I won’t forget the comment of one “progressive” poster – “she doesn’t have the arm strength to hold her own baby – she would have if she’d spent more time with him”

86. Madman in the Marketplace - 8 September 2008

Not trying to pick a fight, but I find it interesting that NOBODY seems to mention Todd Palin. From what I’ve read, he’s spent a lot of time helping take care of the children, supporting his wife’s career. He looked genuinely comfortable w/ the kids during the Republican convention, and proud of his wife.

Why does everybody pretend that he’s not there? I mean, we can’t know for sure, but he seems to be something like what a feminist male/husband is supposed to be. Why is the parent’s proximity more important than the father’s?

87. marisacat - 8 September 2008

Madman out of moderation, about 5 up thread… sorry I had to reboot… took several minutes…

Well everyone can now pick on Todd. He was with them on the stump in MO today. Screaming crowds, lots of women, front row.

I half expected GMA to ask her women friends whom they interviewed this am what in heavens name ae the child caretaking arrangements… we so worried! … but they did not.

BTW, Hillary not too dumb. She is not even mentioning Palin on the trail in FL. But Ob is. Over and voer.

This is not a winning strategy… I am jsut saying.

88. Madman in the Marketplace - 8 September 2008

Agreed that it’s not a winning strategy.

Not that the donks know anything about winning.

89. NYCO - 8 September 2008

85. Todd Palin : Sarah Palin : Judy Dean : Howard Dean ?

84. I wonder why the media isn’t asking “Governor of Alaska, mother of five. How does she do it?” Instead, the line being taken is, “She can’t possibly do it.” Maybe if they dug a little deeper they’d get a sense of what her particular support network is, because every mother has to have one. At no time in human history anywhere on the planet have women raised their babies all by themselves with no support network — it’s just not a cultural norm, at least none that I’m aware of. (sure, some individual women may have done it on desert islands or during wartime…) So why, in 21st century America, do we have this bizarre underlying notion, that a mother ideally does it alone? Good Lord.

The public rancor expressed toward the single mother who’s overwhelmed, troubled or in some way errant, in today’s society, is terrifying. In my area, we had a very sad case some time ago — a young mother was on her way to a camping trip with three kids in her car (her boyfriend was in another car up ahead with some more kids, his and hers I guess). She was pulled over on suspicion of drunk driving, since the car was weaving. Before the cops could question her, she (apparently) freaked out for some unknown reason and sped off, the cops gave chase, she lost control and plowed into a tree, killing all the kids in her car, plus her unborn child. Severely injured herself, she can’t remember what happened or why. (She was not drunk or drugged, it turned out)

Now anyone with half a brain would naturally ask, “OMG why did she freak out? How tragic, surely she didn’t want to kill her children.” Instead, the public reaction from the local neanderthals (male and female) on the local comment boards is “kill her,” “she murdered those precious babies,” “torture her,” etc etc. She was sentenced today and got 1-3 years (I’m thinking the judge’s reasoning is that she’s got to live with this for the rest of her days). Weeping in court, her tears were mocked mercilessly.

And this is a pattern of viciousness that appears again and again whenever a mother, particularly a single mother, can’t take care of her kids in some way. Doesn’t matter if they’re black, white, brown moms — it’s call out the lynch mobs and the dogs; nobody ever asks where the father is, it’s all Curse Her, the Madonna Has Failed! EVE HAS SINNED!!!

As they say “It takes a village” … and when a society has reached the point where there is no “village,” no support system, then maybe women are wise not to become mothers. That’s not a comment on whether or not abortion is moral — abortion is just a piece of that puzzle. But having less children, adopting others’ children, or not having them at all… that’s “choice” too.

90. NYCO - 8 September 2008

As usual, a PS: Forgot to add a detail, that the cops did not know there were kids in the car and didn’t even know it was a woman they’d pulled over. They did not get a chance to look in the car before she sped off.

91. Madman in the Marketplace - 8 September 2008

Nooz @ 11

Cable and network news, though, in all their incarnations, are so . . . colorful. Literally. Wolf Blitzer could easily be broadcasting from the set of Best Damn Sports Show and no one would be able to tell the difference. These supposed newscasters have people who formerly worked for other people talking about the employers of the people they used to work for, set in contrast with other ex-post-ad-hoc-factotums of this or that political luminary, and they all gallop in circles weeping and screaming and speaking in tongues. Then some dude named Jack Cafferty comes on and reads emails that other people have sent to him while pretending to by my 10th-grade gym teacher. A giant lizard named Nancy Grace rushes out onto the set. Catch her! Her tail pops right off and she skitters away. Don’t worry. It will regenerate.

92. marisacat - 8 September 2008

Oh I have a story of neglect. A few years ago here in the Bay Area… an Asian father, working in high tech, drove to work, overshot the child care drop off.. left the child in the car (about 18 mos) and whammo when he came back tot he car late in the day, dead.

Neither his name nor his photo ever made it to evening news or local print media. In a couple of days it was said, the cops determined a very sad mistake.
had this been a woman, and most particularly a woman of color… very different story.

And don’t forget the nasty contemptible SC ruling in “pba” case, rising from the contemptible congressional vote in 2003 on the “pba” legislation, used language from the Catholic Bishops and it asserted that a woman must bond with the baby in utero.

Get over it! This is not a Disney cartoon.

93. liberalcatnip - 8 September 2008

75. Have a new hip to celebrate!

Hey you whippersnapper! Get off my lawn!

94. Madman in the Marketplace - 8 September 2008

93 – climb into your scooter and chase me off!

IF you can still see me across the lawn, that is.

95. marisacat - 8 September 2008

“she doesn’t have the arm strength to hold her own baby – she would have if she’d spent more time with him”

a LOT of commentary around that it was so distasteful that several people hld the baby that night, at the convention, even talk that how dare the baby be out at 10 pm… what a hoot. And so damned dumb and intrusive..

I dunno, she has a very well behaved family. That is what I saw.

96. marisacat - 8 September 2008

new thread………………

LINK

………………….. 8) …………………

97. liberalcatnip - 8 September 2008

79. Are you eating the birthday candles because the cheesecake isn’t ready yet?

I was just trying to figure out what’s PC (cough cough) but then my roomie made me a little cake with a candle so I had to blow that one out. Bad liberal!! (Bad liberal with LOTS of cake now.)

80. Thanks, jam.fuse. I’m more like the cat’s heroin though. 🙂

98. liberalcatnip - 8 September 2008

94. IF you can still see me across the lawn, that is.

HA! Dream on, fellow fogie.

99. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

89, NYCO – brilliant post!! Thank you.

The only thing I would add is that “adopting others’ children” is likewise hugely difficult – just because you didn’t actually give birth to the child doesn’t mean you don’t experience all the challenges of childrearing. Giving birth is the easy part, really.

The story you told was horrific. I’ve never heard it before. I feel awful for the mother. Of course if it had been the father of the kids, the public reaction would have been far different. It’s always “blame the mother”, no matter what happens.

There have been several news stories in the last few years of fathers going off to work and/or being distracted by cell phone calls and leaving their infants in the car to die. But nobody seems to make a big deal about this phenomenon.

In relation to this, I once heard a story about Abe Lincoln – that he took one of his very young sons out on a ride on a buckboard and was so engrossed in his thoughts that he didn’t notice that the kid had fallen off until hours later.

I don’t know if it’s true, but it certainly rings true.

100. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

95 Mcat – as if babies are never, ever, awake at 10 pm. Well, it must be said that some commenters were claiming that he was TOO sleepy, he must have been drugged. Etc. So you can’t win.

Another weirdness was that many commenters claimed Todd P. looked eager to hand off the baby to someone, ANYONE! But I watched the whole thing, and it seemed to me he was comfortable and happy holding the baby. Cindy McC was the only awkwardness in that family tableau.

101. NYCO - 8 September 2008

The only thing I would add is that “adopting others’ children” is likewise hugely difficult – just because you didn’t actually give birth to the child doesn’t mean you don’t experience all the challenges of childrearing. Giving birth is the easy part, really.

I have to disagree with that though. Giving birth is a physical risk for a woman, even in developed countries. It’s one that most women don’t think or worry about too much, however, so it’s not a huge factor.

102. cad - 8 September 2008

“Can we now conclude that your attack on her was stupid and move on?”

No Heather, you conclude that on your own based on your false premise. This isn’t Daily Kos, Armando jr.

103. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

101 NYCO – Oh I agree. I almost bled to death when I gave birth to my son, even though the pregnancy and labor went very well and I was surrounded by doctors and nurses the whole time I was in the hospital. It wasn’t until after the baby came out that bad things started to happen. Thankfully I was in a hospital with an emergency OR and not at home where I originally wanted to give birth.

I love modern medicine.

104. Heather-Rose Ryan - 8 September 2008

102 cad – OK fine, you can continue insulting Palin because she’s a “beauty queen” if that makes you happy – nobody will stop you. By the way, my name is Heather-Rose, not Heather.

105. cad - 8 September 2008

I stand corrected.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: