SAD BUT OFTEN TRUE

Click on the cartoon for the larger view.

"molly and sexual harassment" from nakedpastor.

INFATUATION VS. LOVE

Infatuation is when you think that he's as sexy as Robert Redford, as smart as Henry Kissinger, as noble as Ralph Nader, as funny as Woody Allen, and as athletic as Jimmy Connors.

Love is when you realize that he's as sexy as Woody Allen, as smart as Jimmy Connors, as funny as Ralph Nader, as athletic as Henry Kissinger, and nothing like Robert Redford - but you'll take him anyway.


Cheers,

Paul (A.)

A LONG LONG TIME

 

Incredible!  I'm grateful for our 51 years together.  When the milestones come, I often think, "Well I am still here, still around."  On the anniversary occasion, "Well, here we both are, still around."

I searched YouTube for a good version of a romantic song we slow-danced to back in the day, and I found The Platters, "If I Didn't Care,"  The Platters were greatly influenced by the earlier singing group, The Ink Spots, whose music I loved when I was growing up and who first recorded the song. 
 

 

If I Didn't Care

If I didn't care more than words can say
If I didn't care would I feel this way?
If this isn't love then why do I thrill?
And what makes my head go 'round and 'round
While my heart stands still?

If I didn't care would it be the same?
Would my ev'ry prayer begin and end with just your name?
And would I be sure that this is love beyond compare?
Would all this be true if I didn't care for you?

MONOLOGUE: If I didn't care honey child, mo' than words can say. If I didn't care baby, would I feel this way? Darlin' if this isn't love, then why do I thrill so much? What is it that makes my head go 'round and 'round while my heart just stands still so much?

If I didn't care would it be the same?
Would my ev'ry prayer begin and end with just your name?
And would I be sure that this is love beyond compare?
Would all this be true if I didn't care for you?

MITT ROMNEY FAILS THE 3:00 AM TEST

The 3 a.m. phone call is shorthand for the unforeseen emergency that requires both a quick reaction and the beginning of longer second- and third-stage responses. Often the most important immediate decision is not to react immediately. There are times when every minute counts, but not usually. The first impulse, the first wave of fragmentary information, the first set of available options -- these often turn out to be misleading.
....

In short, when faced with a 3 a.m. test, he reacted immediately, rather than having the instinct to wait. And after he waited, he mistook this as a moment for partisanship rather than for at least the appearance of statesmanlike national unity. The irony, of course, is that resisting the partisan impulse today would have been the greatest possible boost to his horse-race prospects two months from now.

Think of this temperament and these instincts in a command role, and with stakes much higher than they were today. 

Keep in mind that Romney made his first statement criticizing the president last night, even as the embassies were under attack and the situation was changing moment by moment.  Then today at his press conference, he stood by his statement of last night.

COMPARE AND CONTRAST

President Obama this morning.



Secretary of State Hilary Clinton's statement last night:

"Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.

In light of the events of today, the United States government is working with partner countries around the world to protect our personnel, our missions, and American citizens worldwide."

 Mitt Romney's statement last night, September 11, 2012:

“I’m outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi. It’s disgraceful that the Obama administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.”

What provoked Mitt Romney's verbal attack on President Obama:

Earlier today, officials at the U.S. Embassy in Egypt issued a statement that “condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims — as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions.” The embassy said the statement was drafted and released before the protests. But the succession of events drew widespread criticism in the United States after violence broke out for appearing weak in the face of threats. 

Tweet by the chairman of the Republican National Commttee.

What about Americans standing together in the face of tragic death of four embassy employees, including Ambassador Chris Stevens?  Statements by Mitch McConnell (R) and John Boehner (R) demonstrate that now is not the time for partisan attacks.

“Yesterday we commemorated the anniversary of the attacks of September the 11th, and today we are reminded that brave Americans serve us every day at the risk of their own lives,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said in a statement. “We honor the Americans we lost in Libya and we will stand united in our response.”

Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) announced plans for a moment of silence in the House and ordered flags at half staff.

“We mourn for the families of our countrymen in Benghazi, and condemn this horrific attack,” he said in a statement. “Eleven years after September 11, this is a jolting reminder that freedom remains under siege by forces around the globe who relish violence over free expression, and terror over democracy — and that America and free people everywhere must remain vigilant in defense of our liberties.”

Had Romney taken the better part, he would have honored the Americans who died and their families by expressing his sympathy and pausing for a spell, rather than quickly attempting to use the tragedy to further his political advantage.

The attacks on the embassies were supposedly in response to an inflammatory anti-Muslim movie that was attributed to "Sam Bacile", who may not be a real person.  The 15 minute video trailer of the movie that was first believed to have set off the attacks is an amateurish, incoherent mish-mash.  Administration officials are now investigating whether the attacks may have been pre-planned. In the meantime, I will not comment further on the attacks until more information is available.

OH THIS IS RICH

Dick Cheney by Gage Skidmore

Former Vice President Dick Cheney took a shot at President Barack Obama late Monday night after it was reported that the president has attended fewer than half of his daily intelligence briefings.

“If President Obama were participating in his intelligence briefings on a regular basis then perhaps he would understand why people are so offended at his efforts to take sole credit for the killing of Osama bin Laden,” Cheney told The Daily Caller in an email through a spokeswoman.

“Those who deserve the credit are the men and women in our military and intelligence communities who worked for many years to track him down. They are the ones who deserve the thanks of a grateful nation.”

Hey Dick.  When did President Obama claim that he took out Osama Bin Laden single-handedly?   Poor Dick and the Neocons.  This really sticks in their craws.  Bush probably doesn't care, because he said to Fred Barnes about Bin Laden, “I truly am not that concerned about him.”   

What good purpose was served by Dick Cheney and George Bush participating in the intelligence briefings on a regular basis if the two did not do a damned thing in response to the warnings of his intelligence and national security staff that a terrorist attack in the US by Osama Bin Laden might be imminent?

Picture by Gage Skidmore from Wikimedia Commons. 

AUGUST 6, 2001 PDB "A HISTORICAL DOCUMENT"?

I watched Condoleezza Rice's appearance before the 9/11 Commission in growing amazement at her pathetic attempt to justify the inaction of the White House in the face of the President's Daily Briefing of August 6, 2001 titled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US".  Kirk Eichenwald, the author of an opinion column in yesterday's New York Times titled "The Deafness Before the Storm", allows that Rice's contention that the PDB was "a historical document" may have contained a kernal of truth, simply because for months the White House had been receiving warnings even more dire than the August 6 PDB.  Remember the the words of National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Counter-terrorism,  Richard Clark?

Clarke wrote in Against All Enemies that in the summer of 2001, the intelligence community was convinced of an imminent attack by al Qaeda, but could not get the attention of the highest levels of the Bush administration, most famously writing that Director of the Central Intelligence Agency George Tenet was running around with his "hair on fire".

So yes.  In the sense that intelligence and security officials in the government had warned of an '"imminent attack" for months, and the Bush administration paid little heed, the August 6 PDB, the sole PDB declassified for the commission, could be labeled "a historical document". 

That is, unless it was read in conjunction with the daily briefs preceding Aug. 6, the ones the Bush administration would not release. While those documents are still not public, I have read excerpts from many of them, along with other recently declassified records, and come to an inescapable conclusion: the administration’s reaction to what Mr. Bush was told in the weeks before that infamous briefing reflected significantly more negligence than has been disclosed. In other words, the Aug. 6 document, for all of the controversy it provoked, is not nearly as shocking as the briefs that came before it. 

By May 1, the Central Intelligence Agency told the White House of a report that “a group presently in the United States” was planning a terrorist operation. Weeks later, on June 22, the daily brief reported that Qaeda strikes could be “imminent,” although intelligence suggested the time frame was flexible.

Neocons in the White House advised that Bin Laden was only pretending that he was planning an attack on the US, and Bush, Cheney, Rice, et al. chose to believe them rather than the intelligence and security experts.

Woulda, coulda, shoulda...what is point of the reminder on the anniversary of the attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and another intended target in Washington DC, which was prevented when passengers attacked the hijackers on the plane that went down in Pennsylvania, that the intelligence agencies warned the Bush administration for months prior to September 11, 2001, that Bin Laden was determined to strike in the US?  I'm not sure, except to point out once again the incompetence of the Bush administration in its response to intelligence information.  Could it be because the Neocons had an agenda before they reached the White House, and the intelligence had to be twisted to fit the agenda, the agenda being to launch an attack against Iraq?

Now the Neocons, along with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have another agenda.  They are beating the war drums for an attack on Iran, and, once again, the intelligence about Iran's nuclear capabilities is in dispute.  Obama will be more than cautious about an attack on Iran for a number of reasons, including the  possibility of destabilizing further the already unstable situation in the Middle East.

But what about Romney?  From his own website: "U.S. policy toward Iran must begin with an understanding on Iran’s part that a military option to deal with their nuclear program remains on the table. This message should not only be delivered through words, but through actions."

And what would be the effect of an attack on the price of oil?  Do the warmongers, with their macho chest-pounding, who clamor for or threaten a pre-emptive attack on Iran think through to the consequences of a rise in oil prices on the world economy or to any of the negative consequences at all of launching an attack?

I watched with dismay and disbelief as the administration began its inexorable procession to the invasion of Iraq to protect the US and the rest of the world against Saddam's fast-moving development of nuclear weapons and his vast store of chemical weapons, which he could loose on the world at any moment, both of which turned out to be non-existent.  The reason I write is that I don't want our government to undertake this sort of deadly experiment again on the basis of junk intelligence.  I realize that it's quite likely that what I write here will make no difference at all, except, at best, to perhaps remind a voter or two in a swing state about what a vote for Romney might mean with regard to future military actions by the US. 

SEPTEMBER 11 - 11TH ANNIVERSARY

National September 11 Memorial at the World Trade Center

Mission Statement

Remember and honor the thousands of innocent men, women, and children murdered by terrorists in the horrific attacks of February 26, 1993 and September 11, 2001.

Respect this place made sacred through tragic loss.

Recognize the endurance of those who survived, the courage of those who risked their lives to save others, and the compassion of all who supported us in our darkest hours.

May the lives remembered, the deeds recognized, and the spirit reawakened be eternal beacons, which reaffirm respect for life, strengthen our resolve to preserve freedom, and inspire an end to hatred, ignorance, and intolerance.

Above: Photo by Joe Woolhead.

Following are quotes from the first and final verses of T S Eliot's "East Coker":

In my beginning is my end. In succession
Houses rise and fall, crumble, are extended,
Are removed, destroyed, restored, or in their place
Is an open field, or a factory, or a by-pass.
Old stone to new building, old timber to new fires,
Old fires to ashes, and ashes to the earth
Which is already flesh, fur and faeces,
Bone of man and beast, cornstalk and leaf.
Houses live and die: there is a time for building
And a time for living and for generation
And a time for the wind to break the loosened pane
And to shake the wainscot where the field-mouse trots
And to shake the tattered arras woven with a silent motto.
....

Home is where one starts from. As we grow older
The world becomes stranger, the pattern more complicated
Of dead and living. Not the intense moment
Isolated, with no before and after,
But a lifetime burning in every moment
And not the lifetime of one man only
But of old stones that cannot be deciphered.
There is a time for the evening under starlight,
A time for the evening under lamplight
(The evening with the photograph album).
Love is most nearly itself
When here and now cease to matter.
Old men ought to be explorers
Here or there does not matter
We must be still and still moving
Into another intensity
For a further union, a deeper communion
Through the dark cold and the empty desolation,
The wave cry, the wind cry, the vast waters
Of the petrel and the porpoise. In my end is my beginning.

BREAKING SCIENTIFIC NEWS

Science Fact:

There is a species of antelope capable of jumping higher than the average house.

This is due to the antelope’s powerful hind-legs and the fact that the average house cannot jump.

Thanks to Doug.  I've already had two good laughs out of this one.

THE END OF THE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT?

"Ask Mitt Anything" session, May 2007

Mitt Romney: “That pledge says ‘under God,’ and I will not take God out of our platform,” Romney said. “I will not take God off our coins, and I will not take God out of my heart.”

OMG! President Obama will?

Wait!

Obama spokesperson: “The president believes as much that God should be taken off a coin as he does that aliens will attack Florida,” she said. “It’s an absurd question to be raised.”

Whew! I can breathe again. I can tell you; I was worried.

I expect that Romney will mention God more often than Obama, but what does the Bible have to say?

Then the word of the Lord came to Zechariah, saying, “Thus says the Lord of Hosts: 'Execute true justice, how mercy and compassion everyone to his brother. Do not oppress the widow or the fatherless, the alien or the poor. Let none of you plan evil in his heart against his brother.’" (Zechariah 7:8-10)

Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it. (Matthew 7:24-27)

So.  It's not how many times we say God or have the name of God displayed that counts, it's how we put into practice the teachings of the Good Book.

I'm told that Mormons use the KJV of the Bible.

Photo from Wikimedia Commons.  As you see, the picture is from 2007.  Mitt has been running for president for a long time.  I doubt whether Romney would have an "Ask Mitt Anything" gathering now except with a carefully screened group, and even then....