Wednesday, September 29, 2004
Another Thought on Iraq
Between the Kerry flacks, assorted Democratic politicians and run-of-mill liberal Manhattanies, I keep hearing about how there's no evidence that Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda were connected...that there's no link between Iraq and 9/11, etc.
It makes me wonder. When Pearl Harbor was attacked by the Japanese in 1942, did ordinary Americans, as well as journalists, go on and on about it wasn't Nazi Germany that attacked us...that going to war against Germany was diverting us from the real threat of the Japanese...? Or for that matter, I don't remember ever learning about average Americans of the time bashing the president for acting "unilaterally" not involving "allies" or "losing the respect of the international community" like I do today, it seems, by everyone and their grandmothers.
It makes me wonder. When Pearl Harbor was attacked by the Japanese in 1942, did ordinary Americans, as well as journalists, go on and on about it wasn't Nazi Germany that attacked us...that going to war against Germany was diverting us from the real threat of the Japanese...? Or for that matter, I don't remember ever learning about average Americans of the time bashing the president for acting "unilaterally" not involving "allies" or "losing the respect of the international community" like I do today, it seems, by everyone and their grandmothers.
Tuesday, September 28, 2004
The New York Times And Its Readers
Normally, I tend to avoid the mainstream media (CNN/New York Times, etc.). However last night I was thinking to myself that maybe and I should take a look at the latest New York Times headlines, so I can see what the other side is saying.
Needless to say, it was not a pleasant experience.
Reading the letters from readers was even worse.
Regarding the Dan Rather/forged memos scandal, for one reader, the fact that neither President Bush nor the White House challenged "the essential accuracy" of what CBS reported even after Dan Rather apologized, is evidence enough for him that President Bush failed to do his duty, no if ands or buts.
Another woman wrote in that she admired Dan Rather for not cowering before the Republican spin machine and sticking to his guns about the documents until he knew they could not be authenticated. (Uh hello!!! What was Mr. Blather doing in the first place passing off fake documents as real and attacking critics if he wasn't pimping for the Democrats to begin with?)
Another reader wrote in the Dan Rather's "false claims based on documents that turned out to be fraudulent" was nothing compared to President Bush's lies about Iraq's WMD or lack thereof.
Yet another man lamented about how many Iraqis would die in their homes "so that we Americans will feel more secure in our homes?"
The way these people think is truly mind-boggling.
Needless to say, it was not a pleasant experience.
Reading the letters from readers was even worse.
Regarding the Dan Rather/forged memos scandal, for one reader, the fact that neither President Bush nor the White House challenged "the essential accuracy" of what CBS reported even after Dan Rather apologized, is evidence enough for him that President Bush failed to do his duty, no if ands or buts.
Another woman wrote in that she admired Dan Rather for not cowering before the Republican spin machine and sticking to his guns about the documents until he knew they could not be authenticated. (Uh hello!!! What was Mr. Blather doing in the first place passing off fake documents as real and attacking critics if he wasn't pimping for the Democrats to begin with?)
Another reader wrote in the Dan Rather's "false claims based on documents that turned out to be fraudulent" was nothing compared to President Bush's lies about Iraq's WMD or lack thereof.
Yet another man lamented about how many Iraqis would die in their homes "so that we Americans will feel more secure in our homes?"
The way these people think is truly mind-boggling.
Wednesday, September 22, 2004
New York Magazine Article on "The Perfect Pregnancy"
The other day, I was browsing through a newstand when the cover story of the September 27th issue of "New York Magazine caught my eye. "The Perfect Pregnancy" profiles high-powered New York women who are obsessed with staying thin and sexy while pregnant.
Now I haven't been a subscriber to New York Magazine for a long time. But I was curious as to what this article would have to say about women who try to diet while pregnant. I've lived in Manhattan for over twenty years, but quite frankly, I can't believe that some women can be so vain. I mean, if they don't want their lives or figures to change, then why bother getting pregnant? So I decided to make my feelings known to the editor. Here's a copy of what I sent to New York Magazine:
I have not been a subscriber to New York Magazine forquite some time now. I can honestly say now that it's because of your magazine's focus on vain,high-powered, limousine liberal New Yorkers who do nothing but whine about the following:
The expense of living in Manhattan
How they have no choice but to suck up/jump throughhoops in order to get their kids into the "best"nurseries/private schools
How finding a good nanny who doesn't steal from you (when you were stupid enough to give her your bankcard and PIN) is so difficult
How it was possible that the New York police chief may have gone too far and perhaps (gasp!) violated the civil rights of the protesters at the Republican National Convention
With all that being said, the cover of your September 27th issue caught my eye. I was curious as to what your writer had to say about women who are obsessedwith staying thin and sexy during pregnancy (never mind being excited about bringing a new life into the world.) After reading the article, I just have this to say to all those women who say "I've waited until now to have this baby. I'm very accomplished, I'm fit, I go to the gym five times a week, and I really don't want this pregnancy to change my life."
Get over yourselves!!!
Everything in this life is not about you and how you'll look. Parenting is a challenging job. And the fact is, your life *will* change. After all, you are bringing a child into this world, who will be dependent on you to feed it, nurture it, clothe it, shelter it, and teach it right from wrong.
Yet it seems to me that these women view their soon to be born babies as nothing more than designer accessories that will fit in neatly with their lives and not get in the way of their five-day-a-week workouts and their careers.
Now I'm sure these very same women will go on about how "choice" is important -- that it's their bodies todo with as they please. All I can say is too bad these babies have no choice in the type of mothers they're getting stuck with.
Now I haven't been a subscriber to New York Magazine for a long time. But I was curious as to what this article would have to say about women who try to diet while pregnant. I've lived in Manhattan for over twenty years, but quite frankly, I can't believe that some women can be so vain. I mean, if they don't want their lives or figures to change, then why bother getting pregnant? So I decided to make my feelings known to the editor. Here's a copy of what I sent to New York Magazine:
I have not been a subscriber to New York Magazine forquite some time now. I can honestly say now that it's because of your magazine's focus on vain,high-powered, limousine liberal New Yorkers who do nothing but whine about the following:
The expense of living in Manhattan
How they have no choice but to suck up/jump throughhoops in order to get their kids into the "best"nurseries/private schools
How finding a good nanny who doesn't steal from you (when you were stupid enough to give her your bankcard and PIN) is so difficult
How it was possible that the New York police chief may have gone too far and perhaps (gasp!) violated the civil rights of the protesters at the Republican National Convention
With all that being said, the cover of your September 27th issue caught my eye. I was curious as to what your writer had to say about women who are obsessedwith staying thin and sexy during pregnancy (never mind being excited about bringing a new life into the world.) After reading the article, I just have this to say to all those women who say "I've waited until now to have this baby. I'm very accomplished, I'm fit, I go to the gym five times a week, and I really don't want this pregnancy to change my life."
Get over yourselves!!!
Everything in this life is not about you and how you'll look. Parenting is a challenging job. And the fact is, your life *will* change. After all, you are bringing a child into this world, who will be dependent on you to feed it, nurture it, clothe it, shelter it, and teach it right from wrong.
Yet it seems to me that these women view their soon to be born babies as nothing more than designer accessories that will fit in neatly with their lives and not get in the way of their five-day-a-week workouts and their careers.
Now I'm sure these very same women will go on about how "choice" is important -- that it's their bodies todo with as they please. All I can say is too bad these babies have no choice in the type of mothers they're getting stuck with.
I'm almost positive that "New York Magazine" won't print this letter. But it sure felt good writing it and sending to them anyway!
