From politics (moderates who lean to the right) to Pogo (drools during poker stare) to rants (Whatcha expect from savvy, sassy sexagenarians?) to raves (Have you had your kudo today?) -- we never take ourselves too seriously.
We do, however, reserve the right to slaughter an occasional sacred cow. And in case we fail to mention it -- we will never forget....
I've been on Mitt Romney watch for several months. A recent article confirms my speculation ....
After a few false starts, the latest favorite to champion .... [the special interest -- movement conservative] agenda is Mitt Romney, the governor of Massachusetts.
In part, that's because of the unacceptability of the two Republican candidates who are leading in the polls: Rudy Giuliani, the former New York City mayor with a record of supporting gay rights, abortion rights and gun control, and Senator John McCain, who for various reasons, some irrational, is anathema to many social conservatives.
A year ago, there were two possibilities: the Senate majority leader, Bill Frist of Tennessee, and Senator George Allen of Virginia. Both have since imploded politically.
Thus, the infatuation on the right with Romney is growing.
This is noteworthy on two grounds. One is religion. A devout Mormon, he comes from a conservative sect that some evangelicals, other Protestants and Catholics have viewed as a cult. The other is ideology. The charismatic 59-year-old Romney once appeared agnostic on abortion - it should be "safe and legal," he said - when he ran unsuccessfully for senator in 1994 and successfully for governor in 2002. He has also taken a much tougher line against gays,
especially on civil unions, in the past several years. Conservatives, looking for an alternative to McCain, seem willing to overlook these transgressions.
"Mitt Romney is a mainstream conservative," says Barbara Comstock, an activist on the Republican right who will work for his nomination. "He governed in a very liberal state with mainstream conservative principles."
The most notable achievement of that record is an initiative that requires all Massachusetts residents to obtain health insurance. That measure was criticized by the right and left, yet generally won plaudits for Romney.
Grover Norquist, an anti-tax crusader who spearheads Republican issue coalitions in Washington, saw "the party's base rallying around Romney" and dismissed any flip- flops as irrelevant. More important, Norquist said, was Romney's speech last month to 1,500 social conservatives at the Family Research Council: "Romney wowed them."
It will take more such performances to overcome the religious issue, which promises to surface for the first time in presidential politics since John F. Kennedy ran in 1960. A national survey by Bloomberg and The Los Angeles Times in July found that 37 percent of Americans said they would not vote for a Mormon for president, including one-third of Republicans and independents. That is more than two or three times the number of people who said they would not vote for a Catholic or Jew. "There still is a segment of evangelicals who, even if they agree with Romney on conservative social issues, have significant trouble with the theology his denomination represents," said Bill Leonard, dean of the Wake Forest University Divinity School in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. "They think Mormons have concocted a new revelation that is heretical Christianity at best."
Nevertheless, Leonard added, "Romney's candidacy is an illustration of how far Mormons have come; they now are essentially considered an American denomination by most people, which years ago they were not."
Romney, who's stepping down as governor, has been assiduously courting conservatives. In private meetings, he initiates discussions on how to deal with the religious issue. It may be that all he needs is the proper forum - for Kennedy it was a gathering of Protestant ministers in Houston - to allay concern.
In the Republican primaries, Romney has another weapon: McCain. The Arizona senator has done a good job of courting President George W. Bush and some of his supporters, and the two men came out of their 2000 presidential race with a minimal regard for one another. But much of the Republican right wing despises McCain, although he usually votes the social- conservative line. Privately, they say, he does not mean it.
Norquist, for example, dismissed complaints about Romney's past and even suggested that Giuliani might overcome his drawbacks simply by pledging to name conservatives like Antonin Scalia to the Supreme Court. He hesitated, however, when asked about McCain and then said "perhaps if he takes the lead on pro-growth tax cuts," while making clear he does not think that will happen.
Thus, Romney's greatest asset with the activist right may be that he is the leading ABM - anybody but McCain - candidate. To be sure, McCain would be the most formidable American politician in the 2008 general election. When Democrats say Senator Hillary Clinton cannot win the presidency, they invariably mean in a matchup against the Arizona senator.
And the conventional wisdom is if Republicans take a drubbing on Nov. 7, which is a probability, they will have to swallow their reservations and accept McCain as the only candidate who can save the party from another debacle.
Maybe so. History, however, suggests it is unwise to bet against movement conservatives in the Republican Party.
While McCain has never been one of my favs, I'm not confident Giuliani can muster the base that Romney can .... I can, however, foresee McCain in the VP slot with Rudi in a prominent Cabinet position.
Romney has positive international exposure via the Olympics. Election to and being a productive governor in a state hostile to Republicans has to be a plus.
[Adult] stem cell research will be a relevant issue -- his quasi-activist wife has MS.
He's bright, articulate and photogenic. All pluses. By the time campaign season opens, he'll be surrounded by a team that will know how to "couch" negative vibes about his religion.
And, heck -- I have about as much right to express my druthers as anyone!!!
Reader comments were not recording earlier today. Too bad. I received several comments (and email) on the two Lynne Cheney posts. With the exception of one comment -- all have been positive and in agreement with my premise(s) and observations.
The one exception (whose blog confirms that his screen name indeed is "godlessliberalhomo"), opined:
"You are so brainwashed by the extreme right. CNN, like the rest of the corporate media, has an extreme right-wing, pro-war, pro-GOP bias."
My knee-jerk response might have been: "--Am not brainwashed!"
And I thought about his comment. And thought some more. Then I decided that before finishing the housework I've been avoiding all day, I'd respond as I felt compelled to do.
First and foremost -- I'm neither a scholar nor do I pretend to be one, so cut me some slack if I appear to be glossing over some of the more academic points ....
1) It would be nigh on to impossible (unless of course, someone tortured me -- at which time I'd probably [at least pretend to] agree with anything he/she wanted) for me to be brainwashed politically or religiously. Especially by the extreme right. I just don't gravitate to extreme positions. Maybe different positions, but not extreme ones. I'm talking politics AND religion, by the way. I'm a registered unaffiliated (GDI) former-democrat who now leans to the right of center. So sue me.
As for right-wing stuff (per your assumed inference that I identify with fundamentalist religion as a political tenant), let me enlighten you on my alleged right-wing-edness ...
I grew up in the REAL ultra-conservative fundamentalist Appalachian Bible-belt. Whoaaaaaa, Nelly. I used to stand on the back pew and watch foot-washings for hours on Sunday -- enthralled by Sister Hattie who walked up and down the aisle thumping a tambourine on her knee as she screeched "We Shall Gather At the River." The small church I attended as a child was "owned" by neighbors who paid $25 a year to call themselves Baptists.
"Sang [colloquial for sing] that song, Sister Hattie, sang that song." Amen.
(The church was located in a pasture .... Remind me to tell you about the hot Sunday afternoon the cows poked their heads through open windows and bellowed along with Sister Hattie .....) Some things a child does not forget.
But I digress.
From that small mountain church, I evolved into the once-or-twice-maybe-three-times-a-year Episcopalian I am today. My spiritual existence is not godless, by the way, and my exercise of religion has absolutely nothing to do with "filtering" the political bias, the anti-American rhetoric or the Bush Derangement Syndrome I observe in mainstream media. Whether or not it's relevant -- Bill Clinton was the defining factor in my political evolution.
Possibly you confuse my criticism of MSM and praise of Lynne Cheney with your own frustration with the current socio-political climate .....
In my assessment, US nationalism (call it patriotism, if you prefer) has been morphing for the last 10-15 years. I survived the 40's to grow up in the 50's; I volunteered to work as a civilian in Vietnam in the 60's (and am still affected by that experience).... I saw fit to earn 3 more degrees and lived a successful Camelot-life during the 70's and 80's; for reasons I'm still assessing, my life has turned full-cycle since then .... Both because of and for the better, from my perspective.
Politically-speaking, I hold Bill Clinton responsible for the evolution and revolution which my nation (and middle America) have experienced over the last 10-15 years. He is a despicable human being whom I still have trouble accepting as a person who achieved the highest position in this wonderful nation.
Thanks to Bill Clinton -- I couch two political premises associated with the morphing of US nationalism: A) war may be necessary for peace, and B) character and integrity are learned. These two premises have little effect on distinguishing between Republicans and Democrats, in my assessment. Rather, these premises have to do with political ideology. For the sake of simplicity, my "working" reference to a political liberal is power; to a political conservative it's people. As a GDI (gosh-darned independent), I'm somewhere in the middle -- leaning toward fiscal conservatism with a bias toward social liberalism. But there I go digressing again ...
2) CNN is part of corporate America. It's within a large corporate structure. It's one of many, many Time-Warner subsidiaries which affect our daily lives. Yet there is a difference. IMO, mainstream media (MSM) is a tad worse than corporate America. CNN is a news agency. A news agency is usually expected to observe certain professional standards.
"Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. The duty of the journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist's credibility. Members of the Society share a dedication to ethical behavior and adopt this code to declare the Society's principles and standards of practice."
— Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context. — Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage. Use special sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects. — Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.
Make sense? It sure does to me.
3. Without doubt, however, media (plural) tend to be self-serving and seldom if ever represent the objective interests of people. MSM (mainstream media) is a misnomer, actually. There is nothing "mainstream" about op eds and editorialized news. The term MSM is used contemporaneously to indicate "top down" media bias and self-interest. Let's face it: media corporations (whether "free" or government-controlled) decide what they want us to hear, how they want us to hear it, and subsequently create compelling headlines and slants to support their perspective.
The media as pro-government? Not always .... Media DOES attempt to influence public attitude and action. Whether advocating a particular party or candidate, a social or political policy or a corporate position (for example, on immigration controls such as border walls, amnesty, guestworker and citizenship programs) -- we can no longer accept the media-line as either accurate or unbiased. Your criticism is on-target regarding corporate interest in immigration reform: small and large businesses have the most to gain and/or lose.
Immigration is not the only issue corporates are concerned about, obviously. If it weren't considered government intervention (cause that's how corporate media would portray it), I'd like to see all media removed from corporate control .....
Corporate control of the Internet? Now THAT is skeery. It behooves all of us to keep the information highway FREE from the control of governments, communications conglomerates AND dot-com moguls. Every net user should support a free Internet!!!
Maybe if you re-read the previous posts without so much angst (as intimated by your name and your comment), you might grasp where I'm coming from ....
To me, life is not all about godlessness or godliness or having a political persuasion or being straight or gay or Jewish or Arabic or European. It's also (or it's supposed to be, I have prayed) about fairness and respect and unconditional regard for each other.
And, yes. Sometimes I wonder where those "supposed-to-be's" came from. Maybe they evolved from watching those foot-washings when I was a child standing in that church pew. Those were impressionable times, after all. Back in those days, $25 was a lot of money to pay for the right to call yourself something.
The Vice President's wife -- author, TV commentator, grandmother, PhD, spokesperson -- Lynne Cheney, may well be one of Carl Rove's October surprises .... intended or not.
If you didn't see Lynne Cheney blitz the Blitzer on CNN yesterday, watch and read it HERE (previous post).
She's a formidable, fearless, articulate dynamo who takes no prisoners -- figurative or literal. America needs her to confront MSM spin. Now and henceforth.
Don't expect Wolf Blitzer or CNN to invite her back OR to buy her books anytime soon .....
I've not expressed my concern about CNN's biased pre-election special called (no less) Broken Government. I've boycotted CNN (plus their subsidiaries) and did not want to promote them or their anti-US, anti-Bush programming.
I don't know how to wish un-wellness on a news agency, but I wish nothing but failure in all venues for CNN and it's lack-luster BDS slant to bashing anything related to George Bush.
Wolf Blitzer's guest this afternoon was Lynn Cheney. Bet ole Blitz in-turn blitzed the producer who set up this interview (below)....
WB: And joining us now, the wife of the Vice President of the United States, Lynne Cheney, no stranger to CNN. Thanks very much for coming in.
LC: Thank you, Wolf, for having.
WB: And we're going to talk about this excellent new book, Our 50 States: A Family Adventure Across America. This is a book that I recommend for all ages, and I see it's already a bestseller.
LC: I'm very proud of this book. It was an effort of two years for Robin Glasser and me. And it was inspiring the whole time. It's a story of the whole country, told by a family going on a road trip, and my grandchildren love it.
WB: I want to get to that, all that, but I want to pick your brain a little bit on news that's happening right now, including your husband, the Vice President. He was interviewed earlier this week out in North Dakota, and he had this exchange with a radio talk show host. Listen to this:
Host: Would you agree a dunk in water is a no-brainer if it can save lives?
DC: Well, it's a no-brainer for me, but for a while there, I was criticized as being the Vice President for Torture. We don't torture. That's not what we're involved in.
WB: It made it sound, and there's been interpretation to this effect, that he was in effect confirming that the United States used this waterboarding, this technique that has been rejected by the international community, that simulates a prisoner being drowned, if you will. And he was, in effect, supposedly confirming that the United States has been using that.
LC: Wolf, that is a mighty house you're building on top of that molehill there, a mighty mountain. You know, this is a complete distortion. He didn't say anything of the kind.
WB: Because of the dunking, you know, using the water and the dunking…
LC: Wolf, I understand your point. It's kind of the point of a lot of people right now, to try to distort the administration's position. And if you really want to talk about that, I watched the program on CNN last night, which I thought, it's your 2006 voter program, which I thought was a terrible distortion of both the President and the Vice President's position on many issues. It seemed almost straight out of the Democratic talking points, using phrases like domestic surveillance, when it is not domestic surveillance that anyone has talked about or ever done. It's surveillance of terrorists. It's people who have al Qaeda connections calling into the United States. So I think we're in the season of distortion, and this is just one more.
WB: But there have been some cases where innocent people have been picked up, interrogated, held for long periods of time, then simply said never mind, let go. They're let go.
LC: Well, are you sure these people are innocent?
WB: Well, they're walking around free right now. Nobody's arrested them.
LC: You made a point last night of a man who had a bookstore in London, where radical Islamists gathered, who was in Afghanistan when the Taliban were there, who went to Pakistan. I think that you might be a little careful before you declare this as a person with clean hands.
WB: You're referring to the CNN Broken Government special…
LC: I certainly am.
WB: This was the one that John King reported on last night.
LC: You know, right there, right there, Wolf. Broken Government. Now what kind of stance is that? Here we are, we're a country where we have been mightily challenged over the past six years. We've been through 9/11. We've been through Katrina. The President and the Vice President inherited a recession. We're a country where the economy is healthy. That's not broken. This government has acted very well. We've had tax cuts that are responsible for our healthy economy. We're a country that was attacked five years ago. We haven't been attacked since. What this government has done is effective. That's not broken government. So you know, I shouldn't let media bias surprise me, but I worked at CNN once. I watched the program last night…
WB: You were a co-host of Crossfire.
LC: …and I was troubled.
WB: All right. Well, that was probably the purpose, to get people to think, to get people to discuss these issues, because there are a lot of conservatives…
LC: All right, all right, Wolf. I'm here to talk about my book. But if you want to talk about distortion…
WB: We'll talk about your book.
LC: Right. But what is CNN doing running terrorist tape of terrorists shooting Americans? I mean, I thought Duncan Hunter asked you a very good question, and you didn't answer it. Do you want us to win?
WB: The answer, of course, is we want the United States to win. We are Americans. There's no doubt about that. You think we want terrorists to win?
LC: Then why are you running terrorist propaganda?
WB: With all due respect, with all due respect, this is not terrorist propaganda.
LC: Oh, Wolf…
WB: This is reporting the news, which is what we do. We're not partisan…
LC: Where did you get the film?
WB: We got the film…look, this is an issue that has been widely discussed, this is an issue that we reported on extensively. We make no apologies for showing that. That was a very carefully considered decision, why we did that. And I think, and I think, of your…
LC: Well, I think it's shocking.
WB: If you're a serious journalist, you want to report the news. Sometimes the news is good, sometimes the news isn't so good.
LC: But Wolf, there's a difference between news and terrorist propaganda. Why did you give the terrorists a forum?
WB: And if you put it in context, if you put it in context, that's what news is. We said it was propaganda. We didn't distort where we got it. We didn't distort anything about it. We gave it the context. Let's talk about another issue in the news, and then we'll get to the book. The Democrats are now complaining bitterly in this Virginia race. George Allen using novels, novels that Jim Webb, his Democratic challenger, has written, in which there are sexual references. And they're making a big deal out of this. I want you to listen to what Jim Webb said today in responding to this very sharp attack from George Allen.
LC: Now do you promise, Wolf, that we're going to talk about my book?
WB: I do promise.
LC: Because this seems to me a mighty long trip around the merry-go-round.
WB: I want you to respond. This is in the news today, and your name has come up, so that's why we're talking about it. But listen to this:
James Webb: There's nothing that's been in any of my novels that in my view, hasn't been either illuminating the surroundings, or defining a character, or moving a plot. I'm a serious writer. I mean, we can go and read Lynne Cheney's lesbian love scenes if you want to, you know, get graphic on stuff.
LC: You know, Jim Webb is full of baloney. I have never written anything sexually explicit. His novels are full of sexually explicit references to incest, sexually explicit references…well, you know, I just don't want my grandchildren to turn on the television set. This morning, Imus was reading from the novels, and it's triple X rated.
WB: Here's what the Democratic Party put out today, the Democratic Congressional Senatorial Campaign Committee. Lynne Cheney's book featured brothels and attempted rape. In 1981, Vice President Dick Cheney's wife, Lynne, wrote a book called Sisters, which featured a lesbian love affair, brothels, and attempted rapes. In 1988, Lynne Cheney wrote about a Republican Vice President who dies of a heart attack while having sex with his mistress. Is that true?
LC: Nothing explicit. And actually, that is full of lies. It's not…it's just absolutely not true.
WB: But you did write a book entitled Sisters.
LC: I did write a book entitled Sisters. This description…
WB: And it did have lesbian characters.
LC: No, not necessarily. This description is a lie. I'll stand on that.
WB: There is nothing in there about rapes and brothels?
LC: Wolf, Wolf, could we talk about a children's book for a minute?
WB: We can talk about the children's book. But I just wanted to…
LC: I think our segment is like 15 minutes long, and we've now done ten minutes, so…
WB: I just wanted to clarify what's in the news today, give you a…
LC: Sex, lies and distortion. That's what it is.
WB: This is an opportunity for you to explain on these sensitive issues.
LC: Wolf, I have nothing to explain. Jim Webb has a lot to explain.
WB: Well, he says he's a serious writer and novelist, fiction writer. He was doing basically what you were doing.
LC: Jim Webb is full of baloney.
WB: We'll leave it at that. Let's talk a little bit about your book, Our 50 States: A Family Adventure Across America.
LC: You know, one of the reasons I wrote this book is because we spend so much time nowadays talking about things that are negative. And it's not the fault of any particular segment of the society. But we have come to define news as bad news. And so our kids get a steady diet of this is wrong, the government is broken, the war isn't working, the economy's terrible. Even when those things aren't true, our kids are getting a steady dose of negativity. What Robin and I wanted so much to do is to talk about what a wonderful country it is. We wanted to give our kids something positive. And I hope that's what we've done in this book. It's very, very pro-American. This is a book that's very patriotic. There is no question about our view that this is the greatest country on the face of the Earth, and that is what we want kids to take away from it.
WB: The kids who read this book will learn a lot about the 50 states. That's what it's called…
LC: Yes.
WB: But a lot of the landmarks in those 50 states.
LC: Well, not just landmarks, but the vast variety and diversity of our culture. You know, we have everything from the preservation hall band in New Orleans to mariachi music in Texas, to the philharmonic in Boston. We've got all kinds of food. There's a lovely little girl in this book, her name is Annie, and she writes back to her grandma again and again about the different foods she's enjoying or not. In Boston, she says the beans are great, but she's a little doubtful about the cod. So it's not just about landmarks, it's also about the kind of history and culture that I think kids will enjoy very much.
WB: And it is beautifully illustrated.
LC: Robin Glasser is a dear person, and a very talented individual. And I'm very happy to work with her.
WB: We can certainly disagree on what is news, what is serious news, but we can agree that this is a beautifully done book.
LC: Well, I appreciate that. Thank you, Wolf.
WB: How is your husband doing, because there's always concern about his health.
LC: Well, I'm not sure why there's always concern about his health. He's been out on 140 campaigns. He's raised forty-some million dollars for Republican candidates around the country. He's been very busy. He has been serving the nation very well, as I think George Bush has been a really great leader for us during this time of some trials.
WB: We're going to leave it right there. It was kind of you to come in.
LC: Thanks, Wolf.
WB: You came armed. I guess you knew what you wanted to do.
LC: Wolf, I am always prepared for you to ask questions that maybe aren't quite fair, but they're pretty tough.
WB: You did a good job.
LC: Thanks, Wolf.
WB: Thank you.
Here's a video clip in case you can't "read" how Lynn Cheney literally up-ends the Blitz ....
Sharp, sharp lady. Sharp enough to be President, methinks. Oh, why not. Lynn Cheney for President!
Those kids over at MySpace are having alllll the fun. At least, according to Lore Sjoberg.
I found Lore on Wired News .... Good writer. Convincing satirist. Who wouldn't like to meet a guy who describes himself as "Born helpless, nude and unable to provide for himself, Lore Sjöberg eventually overcame these handicaps to become a collector, a director and a midnight specter." My kinda guy. So to speak.
Here's Lore's experience at MySpace:
The immediate effect of my publishing a link to my MySpace page last week was that I started getting friend requests from people with names like "Señor Discount" and "Johnny One-Spur." It seems shallow to accept people I've never met as friends, but I like to think that anyone named "Señor Discount" is excellent friend material, online or off. Anyhow, after approving all my new friends and triggering about 400 server errors in the process, I now have 319 friends. That's what I love about the internet -- it allows you to have more friends than casual acquaintances.
I don't really know what to do with my 319 new online chums, compatriots and cronies, but frankly I never knew what to do with my meat friends either. I usually took them to mini-golf, but that doesn't seem to be an option on MySpace. I think you just collect them, as they collect you. It is the 21st century, and we are all each other's Hummel figurines. I think MySpace should take a hint from collectible figure games like HeroClix, and find a way to let you make your friends fight.
Lacking such an outlet, I return to setting up house. Looking at randomly selected MySpaces, I discover that one of the most important things to do with your page is embed random crap from other places on the web. Ha! Easy! I have spent a decade creating random crap! I am responsible for 0.00000001 percent of all the random crap on the web! Random crap is my soul name! So I throw some of my own random crap up there. Already, I am feeling at one with the Great Mother MySpace. I just wish she'd load quicker.
Next step is to add a background image. There are pages on MySpace without background images, but all they have going for them is legibility. Take it from me, a massive picture of an anime demon kitty in high heels and an extremely skimpy nurse's outfit says more about you than a thousand readable blog entries could. I don't have a picture like that, though, so I put up a photo I took of a frozen pizza I once bought that was supposed to be half pepperoni combo and half cheese, but the cheese "half" took up a lot more space than the combo half. I think that says a lot about me, too.
Finally, there's the issue of music. MySpace makes a big deal out of music, probably because when someone named "The Great Bodhisattva" asks you to be his friend, you need to know if he likes Steely Dan. (He does.)
MySpace makes it easy to upload your music, it makes it easy to promote your band, and it makes it easy to embed music into your page so that everyone has to listen to it while they wait for your random crap to load. I don't know when it became acceptable to blare Journey at helpless visitors, but on MySpace it's something close to mandatory.
When in Rome, annoy visitors to your web page. I need to pick a song to inflict upon those who dare visit my realm. I could go through the numerous talented independent artists who are using MySpace as a way to get much-needed exposure in the cut-throat, corporate-choked world of mass media, but I've got two episodes of Battlestar Galactica waiting for me on the TiVo, so I just upload a recording of myself singing a sensitive acoustic version of "Head Like a Hole."
I look upon my MySpace, and I see that it is good. Each part of it competes with the other for attention, creating an experience that blasts the senses, yet leaves the psyche unaffected. The many voices combine into a colorful but meaningless roar. A metaphor, perhaps, for MySpace as a whole, or the web, or perhaps all of human existence. I also had a shirt like that once.
On second thought, I think I'll just stay here and let Lore keep alll those friendly folks out of MYspace!
Yesterday (Oct. 24) was United Nations Day. How could I have missed such an important holiday? OK -- I'll fly the U.N. flag today.
The only pic I have is the one flown with the Hezbollah flag on the Lebanon-Israeli border .....
Sean Gleeson offered 10 suggestions for how U.N. Day could be celebrated:
Explain to your children what war was, and tell them how on this day in 1948, all the countries got together to make sure it never happens again. If there's time, mention the Tooth Fairy, too.
Make and decorate a "donation box" with recycled paper, and take a collection around the office for feeding starving children, or spaying stray cats, or any other worthy charity. Then turn out the lights for a minute. When the lights come back on, display the empty box. Say, "whoops!"
Take a nap.
Visit a high-crime area, and when you see a crime being committed, announce that you do not approve, not one little bit. Duck.
Hold a "Mock United Nations" session, in which all the participants come up with their own reasons to mock the United Nations.
Bury your children in the backyard, up to their necks, and let them play "U.N. Peacekeepers"!
Appoint the office receptionist to be "America." Everyone else make speeches about how "America" is an evil, lowdown, dirty prostitute, until she pays each of you $1000.
Tonight, make it a "U.N. Dinner"! I mean, chicken.
Bake cookies in the shape of every member nation, and decorate them in their national colors with icing and sprinkles. Sing a peace chant while you crumble Israel into little bits, and flush it down the toilet.
Invite Cindy Sheehan to your house to give a lecture about how George Bush caused Hurricane Katrina because Halliburton hates owls. (She'll really come, too, if you tell her you're a reporter for Newsweek. I've done it four times myself.)
Sounds like loads of fun. The very first date I'm going to circle in my 2007 UNICEF calender will be October 24!
Who are their sponsors, advertisers and subsidiaries?
Boycott them all.
Let Soros, Turner, AOL, Time-Warner and other MSM mouthpieces who feature the video of an American soldier being shot by terrorists snippers pay for Anti-US propaganda outta their OWN pockets.
On October 23, 1983, around 6:20 am, a yellow Mercedes-Benz delivery truck drove to Beirut International Airport, where the 1st Battalion 8th Marines, under the U.S. 2nd Marine Division of the United States Marines, had set up its local headquarters. The truck turned onto an access road leading to the Marines' compound and circled a parking lot. The driver then accelerated and crashed through a barbed wire fence around the parking lot, passed between two sentry posts, crashed through a gate and barreled into the lobby of the Marine headquarters. The Marine sentries at the gate were operating under their rules of engagement, which made it very difficult to respond quickly to the truck. By the time the two sentries had locked, loaded, and shouldered their weapons, the truck was already inside the building's entry way.
The suicide bomber detonated his explosives, which were equivalent to 12,000 pounds (about 5,400kg) of TNT. The force of the explosion collapsed the four-story cinder-block building into rubble, crushing many inside.
About 20 seconds later, an identical attack occurred against the barracks of the French Third Company of the Sixth French Parachute Infantry Regiment. Another suicide bomber drove his truck down a ramp into the building's underground parking garage and detonated his bomb, leveling the headquarters.
Rescue efforts continued for days. While the rescuers were at times hindered by sniper fire, some survivors were pulled from the rubble and airlifted to the RAF hospital in Cyprus or to U.S. and German hospitals in West Germany[1].
The death toll was 241 American servicemen: 220 Marines, 18 Navy personnel and 3 Army soldiers. Sixty Americans were injured. In the attack on the French barracks, 58 paratroopers were killed and 15 injured. In addition, the elderly Lebanese custodian of the Marines' building was killed in the first blast. [1] The wife and four children of a Lebanese janitor at the French building also were killed.[2]
This was the deadliest single-day death toll for the United States Marine Corps since the Battle of Iwo Jima (2,500 in one day) of World War II and the deadliest single-day death toll for the United States military since the 243 killed on 31st January 1968 — the first day of the Tet offensive in the Vietnam war. The attack remains the deadliest post-World War II attack on Americans overseas.
I've been on Mitt Romney watch for several months. A recent 
Lynne Cheney: 
yesterday, watch and read it 
I really need to get out more. 
I hate when I do that. 
to 
.... lest we forget ....