DH:
Obama is a tool.
He's really a dick. 
He should go swallow a dick. Wait, he is a dick.
Go swallow yourself, Barry.

Me:
Hysterical laughter, choking, and tears running down my face

DH:
(with one finger raised, as a finger puppet; in a cartoon voice) I'm a tool.

Me:
Hysterical laughter, choking, and tears running down my face.  Pain in my guts from the laughing.

Obama (on TV):
blah, blah, vote for me (pauses)

DH:
(same finger puppet and voice) Because I'm a tool!

Me:
Hysterical laughter, choking, and tears running down my face, hiccupping, now running for the bathroom...

Perhaps you either have to know my usually mild-mannered unflappable husband to get it.  Or maybe you had to be there.  Either way, I am still giggling 12+ hours later.

I love you, hon!

Posted by: caltechgirl at 10:41 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 158 words, total size 1 kb.

Damn cold medicine. It makes me loopy, so just a few quick takes for y'all

It has become increasingly clear to me that the Democrats are scared shitless of Sarah Palin. The sheer amount of vitriol being flung around (BTW, anyone know what vitriol REALLY is?) combined with the increasing hysteria about the fact that they can find any dirt that seems to stick is becoming increasingly laughable. Memo to the MSM: when hardcore BDS suffering Liberals begin to feel that the all-out, anti-Sarah barrage is TOO much, it's time to back off. And on a related note, so what if Sarah won't sit don for yet another hit-piece interview? Who said she had to let you piss in her sandbox? Or that she had to play your game? Especially when the rules change more frequently than Calvinball and the only thing that stays the same is that Sarah loses...

ESPN makes me happy. Not sure why, but there's really something comforting about being able to turn on something on the TV that sounds like the news, but won't make me scream and throw things at the TV. I need the "audio/visual wallpaper" when I'm working. Usually I have FoxNews or the local news on, but I just am so tired of knowing more about the story being reported than the editor or reporter who write and read the news scripts.

Anyone else think Kenley's dress on Project Runway last Wednesday looked like something Betty would wear on Ugly Betty? Yeah, me too.

Fake sudafed is for shit. It works about 1/10 as well as the real stuff, and they don't make the formulation that works for me with the real stuff any more. AARRGH. So I suffer. Benedryl ain't cutting it either, and I am sneezing every 5 minutes. Not to mention waking up every 45 minutes and sleeping badly in between...

Just waiting to see if shit rains down on my head about coming home early. I met all my responsibilities for the day, I taught my class and picked up HW and went to my meeting, where I also sat far away from everyone so I wouldn't give them germs.

I still have a hell of a lot of work to do, and a million small personal things to get taken care of. But I think it's nappy nap time.

Two quick links before I go:
1. Check out the investigative journalism done by the fine folks at My Pet Jawa regarding anti-Palin "viral" videos

2.wRitErsbLock went to see the Sarah Palin rally at the Villages, FL this weekend, check out her pictures.

Posted by: caltechgirl at 01:11 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 449 words, total size 3 kb.

Further proof that the Left has lost their minds.

Wendy Doniger, professor of Divinity at the University of Chicago on Sarah Palin:

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."

Posted by: caltechgirl at 07:06 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 74 words, total size 1 kb.

Now this is an EFFECTIVE political commercial!

Posted by: caltechgirl at 12:22 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 36 words, total size 1 kb.

Betanews has summarized (pretty fairly, I might add) the technology issues records of both sides' POTUS and VPOTUS candidates.

Interestingly, Betanews reporter Ed Oswald found that Sarah Palin has championed distance learning programs and tele-medicine development as Governor of Alaska, and has used the internet to make her administration more transparent.

Find the candidates' records here:

John McCain
Sarah Palin

Barack Obama
Joe Biden

h/t Slashdot via Twitter

Posted by: caltechgirl at 12:33 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 76 words, total size 1 kb.

John McCain did what he needed to tonight. He was positive, forward-looking, and highlighted why HE was the best candidate for president. He pointed out differences in his platform and that of the Democrats, but he didn't really go after Obama. Which was a SMART move.

Certainly, it was not as electric as Gov. Palin, but in my opinion, he drew people in and hooked his audience pretty well.

I liked that he had some substantive nuggets of policy. That he will push comprehensive energy reform, looking to new and cleaner sources of energy, as well as taking advantage of our OWN resources. That he favors school choice which includes public school options, and not just vouchers for private schools. That he wants to retrain American workers for modern jobs instead of chasing down the long-gone factories, because they sure as hell aren't coming back.

Most of all, I loved that he said this:

I'm not running for president because I think I'm blessed with such personal greatness that history has anointed me to save our country in its hour of need. My country saved me. My country saved me, and I cannot forget it. And I will fight for her for as long as I draw breath, so help me God.

Yeah, he may be a complete asshole, but he talks good. And I want to see what he and Sarah will do in Washington.

See for yourself:

Posted by: caltechgirl at 10:02 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 270 words, total size 2 kb.

I am blown away. Just blown away.

Maybe because I agree with almost all of the things she said tonight, but she is a dynamic speaker with a common, inviting manner that makes you WANT to listen to her.

I loved her speech. I still want to hear her speak to Troopergate, and why she filed an ethics complaint on herself. I want to know more about her earmark requests and whether that's consistent with McCain's position on pork.

But I think she did a masterful job of introducing herself, avoiding distasteful issues, and SKEWERING the Democratic ticket on a number of issues.

I look forward to more from Sarah as the campaign continues, and I think she'll continue to prove just why John McCain picked her as his running mate.

UPDATE: Here's what some of my Cotillion sisters thought of Sarah's speech:

BSCBeth blogging at RightPundits

Fausta

See Jane Mom

Right Wing Sparkle

Ith

Zoey at Blatherings

BethW at Yeah, Right, Whatever

Little Miss Attila

Kat at Cat House Chat

And here's Sarah herself. All 45+ minutes of her speech:

Posted by: caltechgirl at 08:44 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 188 words, total size 2 kb.

Why didn't you run? I damn near peed myself watching you kick so much "pinkytoe" (to steal a sarahk-ism). This was among the best political speeches I have ever heard. I really hope John rewards you with some kind of role. In any case, I look forward to your time on the campaign trail....

And, Joe, my man, your Democrat friends are taking you off their speed dials tonight. That took serious balls. My hat's off to you for going through with the courage of your convictions and backing your friend for President.

Can't wait for the Sarah-Cuda tomorrow. I really look forward to hearing what she has to say for herself, and how she responds to the rivers of BS that have been spewing since Friday.

Posted by: caltechgirl at 12:05 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 147 words, total size 2 kb.

1 I didn't know if Fred's speech excited me because I'd wanted him to run so badly... or if it was just a great a$$ kicking speech. But my husband and I loved it.

Posted by: pam at September 03, 2008 03:46 AM (l6NIn)

2 Thompson was incredible -- they definitely picked the right person to deliver that bit of history. I'll admit I fell asleep during Lieberman, and I look forward to Palin tonight too...

Posted by: Marie at September 03, 2008 04:20 AM (UunPp)

3 Fred rawked!

Posted by: wRitErsbLock at September 03, 2008 05:01 AM (+MvHD)

4 and can you believe the excerpt they keep playing on NBC is when he called Obama unqualified? I can't believe they picked that sentence to vilify their hero.

Posted by: wRitErsbLock at September 03, 2008 05:02 AM (+MvHD)

5 I watched the youtubes this am...and wanted to cry I loved it so much.. Thompson/Palin.... that would have rocked... I watched Fred, and thought, Why in the hell did you not make this speech months ago...

Posted by: awtm at September 03, 2008 04:44 PM (EgGGv)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I didn't intend on more Sarah-blogging today, but you people are making me swear (profanity alert below)....

Seriously? Are you seriously gonna run with this whole Sarah Palin is an irresponsible mother thing? The "Sarah the Hypocrite" meme?

Give me a motherfucking break.

First of all, would you be so "outraged" if the mom in question was Hillary Clinton, and the daughter a teenaged Chelsea? I fucking doubt it. And yet, the Clintons ran on a family values ticket, too. Maybe not as conservative as the Republicans, but I've heard Hill trumpet that family values thing a million times and so have you. No use denying it.

Second, you show me a parent, working or otherwise, who is going to sit on their 17 year old daughter 24/7/365. Kids do dumb shit. We all did something stupid or wrong as teenagers. We had sex, we drove too fast and recklessly, we drank, we smoked, we did drugs. If our parents never found out, it's because we just got lucky and got away with it, whichever of the above that we did before we turned 20. Bristol Palin just wasn't so lucky. Every parent who has ever been a child knows that no matter what you tell your kids, or how often you tell them, some things they are just going to do, from day one, and some lessons they have to learn for themselves. From "stoves are hot" to "sex is how you get pregnant".

Tell me how it makes you a hypocrite when your kid fucks up? I assume Sarah and Todd have told all their older kids about the consequences of sex. If they told her, and continued to reinforce their values, what else can we ask of them? It's not like Sarah held Bristol down and forced her to sleep with her boyfriend.

And what of that relationship? It looks like Bristol and her boyfriend are planning to do the responsible thing and marry and raise their child. Shouldn't we encourage that? Shouldn't we applaud a young couple with the maturity to face the consequences of their actions and face life head on? Chances are very good that this young couple will be better situated to succeed academically and otherwise given that they both appear to have supportive families who will help them in this time of extreme transition.

Don't tell me you don't know anyone who has ever been in this situation, either the teenage mom/ dad or their parents. It's a tough thing. I'll bet you weren't so harsh and judgmental towards the people you know. I'll bet they told their kids (or were told by their parents) not to have sex, too. They didn't listen either.

And you didn't go off the deep end. You were probably understanding, caring, even, maybe said a prayer for healing. You were probably willing to forgive the mistake and move forward. For your friendship's sake. For your family's sake.

So why the hatred towards Sarah and her family? Is it because you're terrified she can defeat your Messiah of Hope and Change? Is it that her political "inexperience" still beats your guy's "experience"? Is it because she singlehandedly knocked your guy out of the news cycle ALL WEEKEND?

It's kind of silly, the way you people look. Foaming at the mouth is unbecoming, and especially so when it's so out of proportion as a reaction.

According to the record, Sarah Palin has been nothing but a caring mom trying to do her best by her state and her family. Maybe that's too much for you to handle and it confuses you. I don't know. But then again, if your brains were working properly you might be asking the same tough questions of Obama and Biden that you demand of McCain and Palin.

Otherwise, just don't go there. And hopefully that's the last I will have to say on this subject, except to wish this young couple and their baby all the best in a long happy life together.

Posted by: caltechgirl at 05:27 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 674 words, total size 4 kb.

If you only read two articles on Sarah Palin, you should make time for these two by Time Magazine's Nathan Thornburgh.

"Where Palin Made her Name":

The news of Palin's selection is an intoxicating mix for the people here: pride in a hometown hero, good news (finally!) for a scandal-racked Alaska, and, for this deeply red part of the state, relief that the Republican Presidential ticket just got a lot more conservative than it was.

No wonder T-shirts saying Go Sarah! started sprouting up by mid-afternoon. Beagley's own homemade batch of 150 McCain/Palin t-shirts arrived at 2 p.m. and were sold out within the hour, leaving Palin fans sifting in vain through piles of shirts that say Grim Reefer and Chicks Dig Me. In town, businesses have been putting up exuberant messages of support, as if Sarah! was once again on the high school basketball team, headed off to state finals.

So his name is Levi. That's about the only thing that I didn't know about Bristol Palin's pregnancy. The rest of the details I picked up almost without trying, while talking about other things with townsfolk — some who know the governor and her family well, some who don't. It was, more or less, an open secret. And everyone was saying the same thing: the governor's 17-year-old daughter is pregnant, the father is her boyfriend, and it's really nobody's business beyond that.

Posted by: caltechgirl at 03:05 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 259 words, total size 2 kb.

I've been quietly cheering behind the scenes since Friday's announcement, waiting to see how things would shake out.

Day after day, the more I learn about Gov. Palin, the more impressed I am. Why you ask? Because I am convinced that she is a genuine person who is committed to the ideals of public service that this country was founded on.

Remember the movie Dave? How Dave is motivated to be involved in making a difference because he sees how important it is after pretending to be President? I am convinced that Sarah Palin feels that way. She started out in the PTA, and then the city council before being elected Mayor. Her track record shows that she is interested in fair government, small government, and reform above all else.

I am excited to have a politician on the national scene for once who "gets it" , and who is in fact a public servant, rather than a self-serving politico, although I have some concerns about some of her views.

The other thing I like about Sarah Palin is that she is just normal. She's a mom, juggling work and her 5 kids with the help of a seemingly devoted husband. It pisses me off that some would insinuate that her husband is incapable of helping her take care of the kids. He may be a man's man (from all appearances) but he also seems to love being a dad and relish the chance to be involved with his kids' lives. And so what if her 17 year old daughter is pregnant. Does that really reflect on the parents anymore? Is it a shameful thing these days to have a child out of wedlock?

I'd argue that it doesn't and it isn't. And furthermore, whether Palin is elected VP or not, I'd say that Bristol and Levi's baby is starting his/her life with a lot more on the plus side than most babies born to teen moms and dads.

If anything, Bristol's pregnancy and her parents' support reflects positively on the Palin family. That they love their daughter and support her in the face of what must be an incredibly difficult time for her. Some might say that Gov. Palin is selfish, campaigning and putting her daughter in the spotlight while she copes with the difficulties of being pregnant and the idiots who would rebuke her for being so young and unmarried. And yet it seems that this would be Bristol Palin's fate anyway. After all, her mom IS the governor. And anyway, having a baby is a blessing, not a catastrophe.

I can't wait until one of the attack dogs representing the Obamamama campaign tries to make Bristol Palin into this year's Mary Cheney. That's when the metaphorical excrement will be hitting the air conditioning...

Yeah, I like that she's a conservative and that she is an NRA member and all that. But that's not what makes her so refreshing as a candidate, and it's not what is energizing the party.

And the left is energized too. I mean, they must be so scared they're running in circles. They can't criticize Gov. Palin. They can't find trash on her, so they invent stories. Some of which are so far off base that they're scientifically IMPOSSIBLE. I laughed out loud at Alan Colmes' insinuation that poor prenatal care was the cause of Trig Palin's Downs Syndrome.

This is the voice of the left, my friends, shrill and irrational, grasping at any straw to tear down their opponents, regardless of party. It's almost like Colmes felt so compelled to say something, ANYTHING, that he opened his mouth to get in on the dead air first. That he spoke before he even knew what he was saying.

If the liberals are reaching so hard that all they can do is make shit up, we on the right have every reason to rejoice and support a ticket that CAN win in November.

Posted by: caltechgirl at 01:50 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 669 words, total size 4 kb.

Even though I know it's little more than a publicity stunt, I appreciate the Republican Congress critters who are trying to do something about the energy price crisis and the economy. They'll be staging phantom sessions throughout the Congressional recess, and you can keep up with what's going on even though C-SPAN won't be covering the proceedings.

This message came tonight via the Facebook Group "Let's Rock The House!":

On Sunday, over thirty Republican Members announced that they would return to the House of Representatives to continue the Guerilla Congress's phantom sessions. Members will continue to discuss the need for an 'all of the above' energy plan with visitors, and keep the pressure on the Democrats to reconvene the House and allow a vote on offshore drilling.

The session is expected to begin around 10 AM Eastern. The designated Twitter hashtag for who are stepping up to get footage from the event is #rth, and Eyeblast.tv has offered to promote any media uploaded to the website. The Twitter feed #dontgo, accessible at http://dontgo.us, will be used by members and other observers to relay information about the event itself outside the Capitol.

If you plan to report from the event, be sure to stick to #rth and upload to Eyeblast.tv. From there, we will need all of you to alert the media about the Eyeblast content and promote it as much as possible.

Be sure to follow http://dontgo.us and Rock the House for continuing developments tomorrow.

UPDATE: Cotillion Sis Nicki has a pretty good list of Congressional Twitterers posted today. Check it out!

Posted by: caltechgirl at 11:01 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 299 words, total size 2 kb.

This weekend was our un-official staycation. We went out and had fun on both Saturday and Sunday.

Saturday evening, Hubby's college roomie and his wife joined us for dinner and a movie. Had some terribly overpriced Mexican food at Paseo Cantina and then wandered over to the Paseo theater for a moderately over priced film. $21 just for the tickets. Ouch. Especially considering the last time we went to movies regularly, we'd get in for just $10. For both of us. Of course, this is was Sunday afternoons in Chapel Hill, not Friday night in Pasadena.

In case you're wondering, we saw the X-Files movie. It wasn't terrible. I'd give it 3 stars out of 5. Mostly because there was nary an alien to be found. It was, has our friend described it a "monster-of-the-week" episode, albeit a long one. Mulder-Scully shippers will truly appreciate the film, because (spoiler here, sorry) it pretty much answers the "Are they or Aren't they?" question once and for all, portraying our favorite odd couple in a long term, somewhat committed, and intelllectually intimate relationship. My take: It was a good X-files fanfic. But I appreciate that as a Mulder/Scully fan.

On Sunday we drove out to Simi Valley and took in the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library. We also met Jen and Beau and Jesse "Speaks" there! They are in CA on vacation, and were staying with family in Santa Barbara, so we met in the middle!

Jen and Beau are both as fun and awesome as you would imagine from their blogs, and that little Jesse is a charmer. If a bit shy.... although he seemed to really warm up to DH and even let DH hold him for a bit in the elevator!

The museum itself is really amazing. It was a lot like the Presidential Gallery in the Smithsonian, but more up close and personal. My favorite exhibit, other than Air Force One, which deserves its own post, was the Reagan Diaries display with his personal diary on the desk, laid open to March 30, 1981, the day he was shot. At the top of the right-hand page, he wrote "Getting shot hurts."

DH was also a big fan of the doodads and geegaws and random things that were given to the Reagans as gifts from people around the world. The sheer randomness of some of it was just unbelievable.

A funny story: The former president oversaw much of the construction detail, especially the White House replicas (the South Portico, Colonnade, and the Oval Office), and he was very concerned when the contractor indicated that the Oval Office would be an exact replica of the White House, except for the ceiling, which would have to be 2.5 feet lower in the museum due to the building's engineering. Never one to back down, Mr. Reagan replied, "Well, if you can't raise the ceiling, lower the floor." And indeed, you must go down a ramp to the Oval Office, and then up 4 stairs to the rest of the museum and the gardens.

We took lots of pictures, which are posted at my Flickr page. Most of them are public, so click over!

After the museum we headed over to Marie Callendar's for dinner. Now, I know it's maybe not the nicest place in town, but I knew where exactly 3 restaurants were in Simi, and they have Applebee's and Chili's in Virginia! So Marie's it was. Food was good, company was better, and we had a nice meal. And pie. Until Jesse got tired and his dad had to take him out, so we finished our pie and said goodbye to the Speaks clan, knowing Jesse would conk out in the car on the way back to SB.

Posted by: caltechgirl at 04:47 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 630 words, total size 4 kb.

1 We just found (while driving x-country) that Marie Callendar's is related to Perkins Restaurant. Not sure if the menus are the same and all, but the table tents in the Perkins we visited were copyrighted Perkins/Marie Callendar's. Of course, I have no idea if the Speaks family has a Perkins close by, but they were all over the place in the midwest

Posted by: ZTZCheese at July 31, 2008 12:31 PM (Iw+8+)

2 Hey ZTZCheese, thanks for the tip about the Perkins chain. One is about 40 miles away and another is a bit farther but towards my sister's.

Posted by: Beau at August 05, 2008 06:13 PM (0wyQJ)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

A government-sponsored organization (organisation) in the UK now says that picky-eating toddlers may be "exhibiting racist behaviours" bt refusing to eat or saying 'yuck' to flavorful foreign foods. A daily Telegraph article says:

" The 366-page guide for staff in charge of pre-school children, called Young Children and Racial Justice, warns: "Racist incidents among children in early years settings tend to be around name-calling, casual thoughtless comments and peer group relationships."

It advises nursery teachers to be on the alert for childish abuse such as: "blackie", "Pakis", "those people" or "they smell".

The guide goes on to warn that children might also "react negatively to a culinary tradition other than their own by saying 'yuk'".

Staff are told: "No racist incident should be ignored. When there is a clear racist incident, it is necessary to be specific in condemning the action."

If a three year old hears a group of people called "apples" or "chairs" they'll use that word just the same as if it was (as mentioned above) "blackies" or "pakis". All they understand is the LABEL, if that. They are incapable of attaching racist meaning to it at that age because they are incapable of understanding (in an adult sense) what race is.

Furthermore, I find it highly unlikely that a toddler can associate foods with races. Oh, I don't like curry because THEY eat it, where they is some other group.

As for the other labels mentioned in the article "those people" is a way that small children break down the world. These people vs those people, us vs them. It's an easy way for their young brain to learn to classify people and things, to sort out their environment and make sense of everything around them. It's not evil. It's not denigrating, it's just a baby brain learning to work.

I think my favorite of the report's objections, and the one that best demonstrates nanny-ism run amok, though, is "they smell."

Let's face it, small children are absurdly honest and have no politeness filter. they say what's on their mind. Including that some people smell funny to them. It's clear that different cultures come from homes that smell differently. Some burn incense or use flavorful, aromatic spices in daily cooking. To a toddler unused to those smells, someone who comes from that environment WOULD smell funny. Again, not racist, just honest.

The bottom line here is that kids are kids. They are simple, funny, honest, and open. Because they haven't learned how to be polite or appropriate yet. They don't understand that what they say can hurt. And frankly, if a toddler wants to insult you, they're more likely to say "poopyhead" than "blackie" or "paki". A kid who is rude or insulting should be dealt with, but not as an incipient racist. They should be disciplined accordingly, and taught that ALL rudeness and insult is unacceptable, including racism. We should explain why it's not nice to say that another child smells funny without pointing fingers and shouting accusations.

This report, in sum, says a WHOLE LOT MORE to me about the agenda of the authors than the intent of the toddlers.

This whole debate about racism and children is funny to me. Children today are so unaware of racism. They get their ideas about it from what WE (the ADULTS) project on to them. Kids are blissfully unaware of race problems until we tell them that they should be experiencing them.

This brought to mind a more local story. Charter Oak High School in Covina recently discovered that parodic African-American sounding names ("Tay Tay Shaniqua," "Crisphy Nanos" and "Laquan White") were printed in the yearbook under a picture of the Black Student Union, apparently as a racist joke.

I can't help but wonder if the motivation was really racist in nature or just bad taste, and a joke gone sadly awry. Do teenagers really harbor the kind of overt racist feelings implied by these actions? Was it entirely about race? Or were they just making fun of some kids they didn't like, by badly ripping off certain black comedians?

The community is up in arms and the parents are demanding action, but I have to wonder if we're missing something. Are our kids racist? Did WE make them that way? If not, why do they do and say racist things? Is it because they are SO OVER racism, that it CAN be a joke for them. Wouldn't that be considered a good thing?

It's like that classic South Park Question: How long does it have to be with us before AIDS is funny? When can we laugh? Can we EVER laugh about racism? And if we do, who gets to laugh? The opressed? The reformed opressor? The subsequent, non-racist generations? When does it get to be OK? For whom?

*Oh For Christ's Sake!

Posted by: caltechgirl at 11:39 AM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 870 words, total size 5 kb.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one
People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation.

We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed.

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is in the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security.

Such has been the patient Sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the Necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The History of the Present King of Great-Britain is a History of repeated Injuries and Usurpations, all having in direct Object the Establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let the Facts be submitted to a candid World.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public Good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing Importance, unless suspended in their Operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the Accommodation of large Districts of People; unless those People would relinquish the Right of Representation in the Legislature, a Right inestimable to them, and formidable to Tyrants only.
He has called together Legislative Bodies at Places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the Depository of their public Records, for the sole Purpose of fatiguing them into Compliance with his Measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly Firmness his Invasions on the Rights of the People.
He has refused for a long Time, after such Dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the Dangers of Invasion from without, and Convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the Population of these States; for that Purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their Migrations hither, and raising the Conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the Tenure of their Offices, and Amount and Payment of their Salaries.
He has erected a Multitude of new Offices, and sent hither Swarms of Officers to harass our People, and eat out their Substance.
He has kept among us, in Times of Peace, Standing Armies, without the consent of our Legislature.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a Jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution, and unacknowledged by our Laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For quartering large Bodies of Armed Troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from Punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all Parts of the World:
For imposing taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us, in many Cases, of the Benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond the Seas to be tried for pretended Offences:
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an arbitrary Government, and enlarging its Boundaries, so as to render it at once an Example and fit Instrument for introducing the same absolute Rule in these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with Powers to legislate for us in all Cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our Towns, and destroyed the Lives of our People.
He is, at this Time, transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to complete the Works of Death, Desolation, and Tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty and Perfidy, scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous Ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized Nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the Executioners of their Friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic Insurrections among us, and has endeavoured to bring on the Inhabitants of our Frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known Rule of Warfare, is an undistinguished Destruction, of all Ages, Sexes and Conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions we have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble Terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated Injury. A Prince, whose Character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the Ruler of a free People.

Nor have we been wanting in Attentions to our British Brethren. We have warned them from Time to Time of Attempts by their Legislature to extend an unwarrantable Jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the Circumstances of our Emigration and Settlement here. We have appealed to their native Justice and Magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the Ties of our common Kindred to disavow these Usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our Connections and Correspondence. They too have been deaf to the Voice of Justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the Necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of Mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace, Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World for the Rectitude of our Intentions, do, in the Name, and by the Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly Publish and Declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be, Free and Independent States; that they are absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political Connection between them and the State of Great-Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of the divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

Signed by ORDER and

in BEHALF OF THE CONGRESS

JOHN HANCOCK,

PRESIDENT.

ATTEST.

CHARLES THOMSON,

SECRETARY.

Posted by: caltechgirl at 12:02 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 1365 words, total size 9 kb.

1 Best Independence Day post I've seen! Happy 4th!

Posted by: pam at July 04, 2008 05:52 AM (l6NIn)

2 Giving credit where credit is due, I referenced your post today (trackbacks weren't working). Happy 4th to you and yours!

Posted by: Lauren at July 04, 2008 04:11 PM (Pt1kf)

3 Happy 4th and 5th!!

Posted by: Richmond at July 05, 2008 10:52 AM (dMnJ3)

4 Amen!

Posted by: Mrs. Who at July 06, 2008 10:24 AM (z+bTV)

5 I love the internet.

Posted by: Miss Havisham at July 08, 2008 11:35 AM (Fqfrj)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

All over town this weekend, on overpasses and chainlink fences along the freeway there were hand-lettered signs "The war is a lie." and "Bush Lied". I've been seeing them for months now, but it seems there was a concerted effort to add new signs this weekend, as there were more signs in the afternoon than in the morning along the same freeways.

These signs are highly amusing to me. Along with their partners "Impeach!" Impeach who? Yo Momma? Seriously. Finish your thought, ADHD child. Of course, some of the signs DO say Impeach Bush, but I have to ask, why? I mean, the man has about 6 months left in his term. How much of that time is actually useful political time? ZERO. And how long would it take to go through an impeachment process? Probably more time than he has left as President. Get off it.

But the "lie" meme perseverates. And congress commissioned a study of the available intelligence to determine whether the President actually lied. Senator John D Rockefeller led the Select Committee on Intelligence in this investigation. In a statement Thursday, the senator announced, "In making the case for war, the administration repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when it was unsubstantiated, contradicted or even nonexistent[.]"

But is that really what the report says? Not really. Clearly the information at hand was overinterpreted, aka SPUN, into the message that the Bush administration wanted to present. Probably in an effort to convince the American people to get behind the push to war in Iraq.

However, the report finds that in many circumstances, and on a variety of subjects, the President's (and other administration officials') statements on the war "were generally substantiated by intelligence community estimates." These subjects include Iraq's nuclear weapons program, biological and chemical weapons capability, overall WMD capability, and support for AQ terrorists.

Which to me, raises a very important question, namely, How did our intelligence get so far off base? Did our operatives buy into the lies that scientists and supervisors were passing on to the regime? Or did the CIA et al. deliberately mislead both the Clinton and Bush administrations? Where is the actual failure, then? If the President is essentially parroting what the intelligence community tells them is fact?

So then what can we do with this knowledge, that our intelligence is, at best, flawed? How do we use it to plan and implement strategies for dealing with our enemies and their plots to thwart us? Knowing that such critical intelligence may be wrong makes it extremely difficult to build support for military endeavors, regardless of the import to national security.

Which brings me back to lying. Which is the lie then, Sen. Rockefeller's statement that the report finds that "Bush Lied", or the actual text of the report which shows that the intelligence community "lied" and Bush and Co. believed them?

h/t Babalu

Posted by: caltechgirl at 10:53 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 495 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Very logical train of thought... something I'm not capable of lately. I know what you mean about the intelligence... but I still believe that it was not wrong. Hussein had plenty of time to disperse/bury, etc... they have found huge weapons caches buried in the desert... and large quantities of ricin. How much is enough I guess is what I'm asking...

Posted by: pam at June 09, 2008 01:37 PM (l6NIn)

2 That's a damn good point. How much is enough to count as "enough"?

Posted by: caltechgirl at June 09, 2008 01:38 PM (IfXtw)

3 sorry to go way off topic, but please consider yourself tagged

Posted by: wRitErsbLock at June 10, 2008 05:01 AM (+MvHD)

4 They also found a number (several hundred, as I recall) chemical warheads. And last I checked, that is not equal to zero.

Posted by: Ken S, Fifth String on the Banjo of Life at June 10, 2008 08:32 AM (Yh9SA)

5 Think it could it have anything to do with the lack of human intel that former Pres. Clinton got rid of?

Posted by: NAVY CPO at June 11, 2008 10:29 AM (sGtp+)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Rather than the death sentence that could have been imposed, imprisoned journalist Abdul-Karim al-Khaiwani was sentenced to 6 years hard labor. This "lighter" sentence is 100% due to pressure from the US media coverage of the story. Keep talking about it, keep blogging about it.

Jane has all the details here.

Posted by: caltechgirl at 10:19 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 54 words, total size 1 kb.

Jane Novak, who some of you know from her own blog, Armies of Liberation, and also from her frequent postings at My Pet Jawa, was on Fox and Friends this morning talking about her efforts to work for regime change in Yemen. Nice Deb beat me to the video editing and posted Jane's interview on YouTube, so check it out (below) and then go sign the petition! Learn more about Yemen and more reformers in the Middle East here. Finally, tell Fox how happy you are that they highlight these issues and talk to bloggers! Leave a comment here for FoxNews' Alisyn Camerota (who Jane tells me is very, very nice!)

Posted by: caltechgirl at 09:42 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 121 words, total size 1 kb.

The former Supreme Court Justice has a new project: She's a video game developer. In an effort to educate American kids about how the justice system works and the role of the courts, she has been working with Georgetown University and Arizona State to create a program for 7th through 9th graders called "Our Courts."

Sandra Day O'Connor, 78, who served as U.S. Supreme Court justice from 1981 until her retirement in 2006, said she never imagined she would be asked to address a conference about digital gaming.

She said she got involved with developing the project called "Our Courts" out of concern over public ignorance about the judiciary and partisan attacks on what should be an independent institution.

"In recent years I've become increasingly concerned about vitriolic attacks by some members of Congress, some members of state legislatures and various private interest groups ... on judges," O'Connor told the Games For Change conference on using gaming technology for social improvement and education.

"We hear a great deal about judges who are activists -- godless, secular, humanists trying to impose their will on the rest of us," she said. "Now I always thought an activist judge was one who got up in the morning and went to work."

She said it was worrying to see members of the Senate requiring nominees to the Supreme Court to state how they would rule on certain cases during the confirmation process, and to see special interests trying to influence the election of state judges in states where such elections are still held.

"With partisan attacks and political pressure mounting, it's much more difficult to achieve fair and impartial judgments from the judges who are serving," O'Connor said.

The second part of the project will be for young people to use in their free time, O'Connor said, noting that studies showed children spend around 40 hours a week using media, including computers, television, videogames or music.

"If we can capture just a little bit of that time to get them thinking about government and civic engagement rather than playing shoot-'em-up video games, that's a huge step in the right direction," she said.

O'Connor said she had seen from her own grandchildren that technology was the best way to inspire children to learn and it was vital to speak to them in their own language.

Posted by: caltechgirl at 09:32 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 432 words, total size 3 kb.

I am amused at you. Amused in that sort of bemused way, but not really smirking. Funny, but not really worth more than a half smile.

A year ago you were all screaming at each other: "Hilllary!" and "Anyone BUT Hillary" and today that's a moot frickin' point. Kind of like all of the articles/ commentaries/ blog posts that posited "Can anyone beat Hillary?" "Why the Republicans don't have a chance", and my personal favorite "Is the US ready for a woman as President?"

Yeah, guess not.

Of course, Senator Clinton brought this one on herself. She's a bitch. I say that in the most positive way possible. She has balls of brass, and an iron will and frankly, she made Evil Overlord mistake #1: (no, not monologuing....) she showed all her cards too soon.

I've disliked Hillary as long as I can remember, something about these type-A balls-out bitches really bothers me. Now, as most of you know, I'm a real bitch, myself. I don't take shit and I play the game as hard as I can. But I have standards. I can take a note from Laura Bush's camp, too. More flies with honey, and all that. There are lines I won't cross.

Those lines don't exist for women like Hillary Clinton. I have known many women like her. They're determined to step on the top rung of the ladder at all costs. It certainly has cost Hillary a lot. Even more than possibly the presidency. Friends, family, self-respect.

And after this loss, I feel sorry for her. She played the game hard. As hard as she could. She simply got outplayed by a force she couldn't counter, an opponent who possessed a power she couldn't touch: Mystique.

Because really, I think that's what this primary season was all about on the Left side of the aisle. Hillary is a known commodity. We've seen every bad hair day and every fake smile for a decade, and we've seen her get twitchier and bitchier as the years have gone on. We saw her fail at Universal Healthcare and flip flop on the War on Terror. We saw her move to New York just to run for office and stand by her Philanderer-In-Chief.

Barry, on the other hand is a mystery. Black, half-muslim, native Hawaiian (born there, not ethnically), grew up in Indonesia, married to a crazy racist lawyer bitch (allegedly)... Now there's a story. He says a lot of "great things", he gets a lot of airplay, but who the hell is he really? I don't think even HE knows.

The fact that he managed to keep that from us, that he allowed the media to build up a "Barry the Great" persona is likely the single biggest factor in his winning the nomination (presumably). You won't hear this on the news or in the commentaries, but I am convinced that "Barry Almighty" is why voters marked his name more often than Hillary's.

Will he choose her as his running mate? Some say he should, to pick up her constituents and prevent a last minute fight at the convention. I am of two minds on this. On the one hand I think he should strike out boldly, bring in a new running mate and effectively tell Hillary to "make like a tree and leave". On the other hand, the Barry and Hill show would appeal to a lot of their party and give Hillary the spotlight she craves. At least until the AQ jackasses decide to blow up the US again and President Barry has to stick her in Dick Cheney's former "secure, undisclosed location."

Of course, if he's really as bright as they say he is, he'll dump her flat. After all, we all know how badly she wants to be President, and well, we all remember Vince Foster.

So, my friends, you have done THIS ONE to yourselves. At least if Hillary was the nominee, we wouldn't have the prospect of race wars when McCain wins in November. On the other hand, if Barry wins y'all can never pull the race card again.

Thanks, folks. I'll be the one in the corner with the popcorn.

Love,
CTG

Posted by: caltechgirl at 10:40 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 704 words, total size 4 kb.