|
Saturday, March 09, 2002
Posted
5:23 AM
Friday, March 08, 2002
Posted
2:54 PM
Here’s my question: besides nuclear war & all, what are the most devastating potential after-effects of Sept. 11? I would say the erection of trade barriers ranks among them. In a time of recession, war, tightening borders and a thriving anti-globalization movement, it is not hard to imagine anti-trade sentiment spilling out from the Buchanan/Nader margins into the mainstream. Bush has the raw power and alleged moral certitude to avoid this kind of embarrassing, short-sighted bullshit, but he chose not to. Slashing trade barriers in the G-8 countries is the single fastest way for poor & desperate countries to become rich & hopeful, period. Why do they hate us? Maybe it’s because, from time to time, we’re full of shit, and abuse our dominant global position for short-term political gain. That’s not the stuff of “chosen ones,” George – that’s positively Clintonian. Remember, globalization was all the rage in 1910, too…
Posted
1:23 PM
Thursday, March 07, 2002
Posted
4:29 PM
Posted
8:16 AM
... Remember cellphones in the old days?" says Surf and Sip's Ehrlinspiel. "You had to sign up with a different service for the next town over, because there was no roaming. And you had to carry different phones for different cities." Wednesday, March 06, 2002
Since we know that, in fact, exactly 100 percent of theI'm in a grumpy-air-traveller mood, because Charlene has to fly to LA for the day. She always gets frisked. Perhaps she fits some profile of a Polish terrorist. Idiots. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Posted
4:59 PM
Finally, both NBC and CBS ended their news reports, "And in another key race ...," mentioning, briefly, Simon's win. CBS didn't even bother to show a photo. NBC showed a soundless clip of Simon at his victory party last night. That was it. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ According to initial buoyant reports in early February, enraged travelers rose up in a savage attack on the secretary of transportation. Hope was dashed when later reports indicated that the irritated travelers were actually rival warlords, the airport was the Kabul Airport, and Norman Mineta was still with us. --Ann Coulter Tuesday, March 05, 2002
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Posted
6:49 AM
The Anglosphere is defined by civil society, individual liberty, democracy and free-markets. The Englishsphere, [ in India] on the other hand, is defined by English-mangling, chai-sipping, squash-playing, society fatcats whose only claim to fame is a dubious experiment with socialistic capitalism.But it has ever been thus. England has always been a place where freedom bubbles up from below. Never down from the top. It's like some mysterious virus that gets passed among the common people. England ships off its convicts and debtors, dissenters and puritans, bankrupts, malcontents, and penniless adventurers. She dumps them on some malarial shore. Then things begin to happen. India was different, because many of the English who went there were from the upper classes. The real purpose of the Empire was to provide jobs for people who wanted to avoid going into trade. I think India got a big dose of the wrong part of England. But the virus spreads anyway. Maybe it really is something in the language. Perhaps speaking English has certain effects on the developing brain. There's something going on here. Monday, March 04, 2002
Posted
4:12 PM
Posted
11:50 AM
Posted
11:10 AM
If before Sept. 11 you had asked Stanford or Harvard how to make air transportation worse, they would have thrown up their hands and said it's impossible. It only took government 10 minutes to do the job ...Man does she get wound up. I love her. I can't believe she can talk so fast and still be coherent. A girl thing, I guess. She said she started writing a book about liberals and quickly had 600 pages -- so it's being published as two 300 page books. First one coming this June. Sunday, March 03, 2002
Posted
4:42 PM
I remember laughing to myself about mediots (media idiots) who castigated President Bush for not immediately flying back to Washington DC after the attack. I simply could not understand how anyone could concievably make it into US national media without knowing about the well oiled but never before used procedures which bind the President and other top federal officials during an attack. I don't it's stupidity, or not exactly. It's just that if you are a reporter, you try to figure out a formula for a particular type of story, then repeat it over and over. The perfect news story is the swallows returning to Capistrano. You can use the same story every year until swallows go extinct. There is a formula at work here. The event is Building comes down and kills X people. If X= tens, you show the Mayor amidst the rubble. If X = 100's, the Governor will be there. If X = 1,000's, it is expected that the President will show up, or at least comment. Bush was possibly criticized just because newspeople were flapping around feeling helpless and confused when the story didn't take the expected shape. |