I was very angry when I saw the political ad purchased by 3 retired generals and being aired by the MSM. I was angered because its a blatant attempt by 3 very ambitious men to capitilize and politicize the war.

Imagine my elation when I saw the troops counter their efforts via an appeal of their own in a legitimate form of redress for their betrayal at the hands of former commanders. Through an Appeal for Courage that was delivered to Congress these men and women seek to correct a very grave and selfish wrong! Imagine this, in a little over 24 hours 2,936 active military members have signed the Appeal. Please spread the word to others so they may sign too!

[Hat tip to my Good Lt.]

Posted by: Michele at 11:53 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 128 words, total size 1 kb.

My temporarily blogless Blog-bro _Jon, thinks so and shares with us this link to a one on one interview with Fred Thomson. What do you think? Should he run? Is he a viable candidate?

Posted by: Michele at 08:09 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 40 words, total size 1 kb.

Are you? Check and see if your website is banned by our wonderful 'Trade Partners & friends' at the People's Republic of China by clicking through the link and taking the test.

[H/T to D-Ring]

Posted by: Michele at 09:59 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 36 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Since mine is available, any messages you'd like sent?

Posted by: Dazd at May 08, 2007 02:15 PM (Vj2v/)

2 I'm betting that all of mu.nu is banned. Not that anyone would want to be reading me from over there anyway... heh.

Posted by: Teresa at May 08, 2007 02:38 PM (gsbs5)

3 Mazel Tov, and to hell with those commies! There's still plenty of time left in the season of 24 for Jack Bauer to fix this.

Posted by: Cappy at May 08, 2007 08:00 PM (QZirb)

4 I'll bet they can't get to mine from there either. However, the new hard drives have come in. $600 - ack!

Posted by: _Jon at May 08, 2007 11:39 PM (cPJtC)

5 I tried this March 27th of this year and I was not banned... and it still is not banned.

Posted by: vw bug at May 09, 2007 09:02 AM (FPOeI)

6 I'm blocked. I've never been so filled with pride. **sniffle** I tried a few other sites, including a couple left-wing sites like barbrastreisand.com, and they were all blocked. The only site I tried that was available was www.miniclip.com which is a game site.

Posted by: Tuning Spork at May 10, 2007 11:44 PM (+B9ku)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

This morming George Tenet was interviewed by Tim Russert on Meet The Press. In that interview Tenet said repeatedly that although he had opportunities to counter false data or skewed interpretation he did nothing to stop it.

"I should not have allowed my silence to imply acquaissance" with the information that was being disseminated.

Tim Russert pointed out various times Tenet's sins of ommission, by not speaking up to the President & Vice-President, led them and the American people astray. In each instance he admitted that he did not correct the President and he did not establish the truth because he was unaware of what the President said. However, the truth is. as Russert pointed out, he or his office approved every fact in every speech and every position the White House took in every speech during his tenure. Tenet's silence or lack of correction of the facts is not just a sin of ommission, it is in fact lying to the American People!

What gets me angrier, if that's possible, is that in one breath he charges that the Bush Administration was gung ho in going to war in Iraq in one breath, while in another he admits all the intelligence was flawed and he kept his silence. So which is it Tenet? What is the truth? Or perhaps the truth is that you're incapable of telling the truth! And since you're incapable of telling the truth it means you're incapable of recognizing the truth as presented by the French, the British and Italian intelligence agencies!!!

What I see now is a man backpeddling over intelligence where he either repeatedly lied or failed to provide evidence to the White House staff of exactly what was going on prior to 9/11. Tenet should never have been allowed to remain in office as long as he did.

Each time Russert confronted Tenet with key statements in his book, Russert showed that Tenet lied in those passages. His explanation... he either didn't know or he never read the speech or press reports on what the White House said or reported.

THIS MAN IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CREDIBILITY OF OUR LEADERS AND OF OUR COUNTRY BEING TARNISHED BEFORE THE WORLD STAGE TIME AND AGAIN. HE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR LYING REPEATEDLY THROUGH OMMISSION DURING CONGRESSIONAL AND SENATE HEARINGS. HIS RESPONSE - "I MADE A MISTAKE" IS COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE.

In retrospect, Tenet admission that by August 2001, "we weren't giving the President more intelligence, and more of the types of information he needed" to make the correct assessment on the impending Al Qaeda attack is enfuriating.

Tim Russert did an exceptional job at pointing out each time he lied at important moments in history and in his book and though I'm grateful, I still believe Tenet's failures are border on treason.

To say that I'm angry, is to say very little. I have always believed that the intelligence failures and the cuts in funding to the CIA in the 90's caused the deaths of 9/11. Tenet's (gov't lacky) attitude failed us through out his term, but especially when he relied and gave inexperienced operatives and individuals like Valerie Plame and her husband the opportunity to obtain intelligence.

Tenet is right in one thing - when you don't get the right type of intelligence, you're at risk. He still believes we as a nation are at risk; so do I. Folks, that's the ony thing he and I will ever agree on.

Posted by: Michele at 09:55 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 586 words, total size 3 kb.

This post was an email I received as part of an offline conversation with my blog-bro, Jon of We Swear (whose blog is currently down due to technical difficulties). In our discussion, I stated my reasons why Rudy Giuliuni's chances for becoming president are non-existent. In my opinion, the 6 marriages alone, between him and his current wife Judith, are enough to kill his chances. Since I was pressed for blog-fodder and found some of his arguments compelling, I've posted it here in its entirety with his permission.

Voting Trends and Rudy's Chances

First, there are several groups of Presidential voters in this country;
- The Non-Voters (who will never vote)
- The May-Voters (who vote if theyÂ’re really motivated - note that Republicans, Democrats, & Centrists/Libertarians/Independents may be in this group)
- The Centrist / Libertarian / Independent (CLI) Voters (are swing voters, who vote for either Republicans or Democrats depending on the issues of the day)
- The Democrat Voters (always vote their party line, and usually vote)
- The Republican Voters (always vote their party line, and usually vote)
(There may be others... [but I agree w/Jon are few in numbers and therefore inconsequential to his point])

Who will vote for Rudy vs other candidates and why?
The Republicans and CILÂ’s voters will put National Security *way* (^10) above other issues.
The Democrat voters will only look at who is supporting their personal (pet) issues.

The "swing" - if you will - are the Republicans & CLIÂ’s. They will support a Democrat if: a) The Republicans are really weak, b) The Democrats are really good, or c) National Security is not an issue. Most people don't want to have the FedGov actively involved in their life. Democrats do a pretty good job of that. Even the moderate Right Wing (which is different than Repub's) have a "leave everyone alone to live their lives as they see fit, God will decide their fate" attitude.

History has shown that a president who is active overseas will be active domestically. He will interfere with people's day-to-day lives and Republicans generally do that. So in order for a Republican to be elected, (against a strong Democrat) he has to be the type that people (Republicans & CLIÂ’s) believe will not interfere with their way of life while supporting National Security.

Republicans are a very forgiving bunch. I'd bet that nearly every R has a friend who has been re-married. And they are still friends. It isn't an "exclusionary" issue. Neither is adultery. While it is still bad, it isn't something that causes a person to exclude them from their life - like lying or stealing. Those things get you kicked out of a friendship. Relationships? Na. That's private stuff and Republicans & CLIÂ’s don't judge like that.

I predict Rudy will succeed because he crosses the bridge that Republicans, CLIÂ’s and some Democrats see as allowing him to be "acceptable". Remember, in a two-party system, the one who wins is the "lesser of two evils". He will be that.

A very important chunk of voting comes from the second group above, the "May-Voters". Within that are all three of the Democrats, Republicans, and CLIÂ’s. They follow politics but need a "motivation" to vote. They skew polls because they claim to be "likely to vote", but the usually don't. In this election, their motivation to vote will come from the two candidates - some a pull towards, some a push away. The pull towards is the Republicans who love Rudy and the Democrats who love Hillary (yes, she will come out of the DNC as the candidate). The push, however, is going to be a huge motivator. And it will be against Hillary. I've seen polls (yes, the polls I just said were skewed) where 45% of the likely voters would vote just to *oppose* Hillary. That's a _huge_ number. Even if it is skewed by a factor of 10, it is still 5% of the voters who will vote for whoever is running against Hillary. And 5% would have been decisive in the last two elections.

As always, the primary determinant between the R and the D will be which party gets their "base" out to vote. With the Electoral College the way it is (and that's a good thing), the Republicans will have more areas voting on the basis of National Defense than the Democrats will on their disparate issues. And with Rudy being the strongest imaginable on National Defense, he's got a huge chunk right there. If you throw in that he supports many things that CLIÂ’s and "may-vote" Democrats have (abortion, gay marriage) - heck and even the personal issues of many Democrats - he's going to win.

The issues you bring up may be a problem for him with the far-Right. But they are *huge* pulls for people from the center, center-left, and even into the middle-left. And those three groups are much bigger than the far-right.

I'm not saying he will be a _great_ president, I'm just predicting he will be our _next_ president.

Posted by: Michele at 08:06 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 849 words, total size 5 kb.

House Judiciary Votes to Subpoena White House Staff

In the ongoing saga of "As the House Turns", a Judiciary subcommittee voted unanimously today to subpoena several senior current and former White House officials. They are seeking testimony regarding the firing of eight federal prosecutors which you have undoubtedly heard about. Some of those who will be served subpoena's are: Karl Rove, former White House Counsel Hariet Miers, their deputies, and Kyle Sampson, former chief of staff to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

In taking the vote, the committee rejected yesterday’s offer by President Bush to make his aides available to talk privately with the House and Senate Judiciary committees, but not under oath or on the record. Shortly before the vote, White House Press Secretary Tony Snow said of the committee, “The question they’ve got to ask themselves is, are you more interested in a political spectacle than getting the truth?” Subcommittee Chair Linda Sanchez responded, “There must be accountability.” Tune in for tomorrow's episode of this intriguings saga which I will dubb: "Will they or won't they [testify]?"

Posted by: Michele at 12:41 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 186 words, total size 1 kb.

I've been so busy lately with federal legislative issues that I've not been able to deal with things closer to home. And believe me, there's a lot that has been going on right here.

It seems that the NYC Council, which governs over the 5 boroughs and close to 8 million people, have taken more actions towards getting more press for themselves. And I see that in the process, they've caught the attention of some who are quite pissed. I'd really like to know how the NY City Council intends to enforce this law against people using the "N" word.

I'd like to remind readers & bloggers, that these are the same people that have chosen to become the food / fat police, and the cigarette vigilantes. Now you see why I'm looking for greener pastures to graze on. I just told someone yesterday, that my dreams/goals are not coming true fast enough for me. After this morning (see post below), I feel like I needed to leave this city yesterday and move to Montana where I'll have to deal more with cows than with people!

But a thought just occurred to me... when I leave, what will my new blog be called?

Posted by: Michele at 02:10 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 209 words, total size 1 kb.

1 You could always move here to PA. The pastures are greener, we've many cows and you could vote for me *wink, wink*

Posted by: oddybobo at March 09, 2007 02:34 PM (mZfwW)

2 "Letters From Here" ... or in this case of cows..."And the Cow Goes Moo" "Cow Tipping Chronicles" ? Oh I could go on for hours, except I leave work in 5 minutes. heh

Posted by: Dazd at March 09, 2007 04:27 PM (7Ts4D)

3 Little House in Montana? Memoirs in Montana? Narrative of North Dakota?

Posted by: vw bug at March 09, 2007 04:55 PM (yA7GO)

4 Montanta Moooooooosings? Letters from Cow Country?

Posted by: sticks at March 09, 2007 06:46 PM (bo3Ur)

5 LOL Montana Moooooosings Nice...very nice!

Posted by: Dazd at March 09, 2007 08:10 PM (xjwRl)

6 You guys are just too funny!

Posted by: michele at March 09, 2007 09:11 PM (UgY20)

7 "Letters From NYC... Relocated"

Posted by: Jean at March 10, 2007 07:31 AM (YadGF)

8 Wait a sec, you can't be leaving. That's insane! Where's your loyalty? What about "Only the Strong Survive?" If I find a "Letters from Helena" pop up on TTLB, I won't be very happy. *sigh* Screw the City Council...we could take anything they dish at us, can't we? Cummon, please, say it ain't so.

Posted by: Erica at March 10, 2007 03:40 PM (n1ABe)

9 Michele - I can't believe you would leave NYC! And Montana? Now THAT will be an adjustment! Just make sure it's not eastern Montana. The Rockies are much prettier than the plains. I've lived in both, and Billings was flat. Boring. And cooooold! You ARE joking, right?

Posted by: Bitterroot at March 10, 2007 11:23 PM (9FXen)

10 Hey - I have lived in several parts of Montana (and have contacts there if you need 'em). How about Letters from the Big Sky?

Posted by: Richmond at March 12, 2007 05:31 PM (e8QFP)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

So I was right in the groove of a really funny political post which has been brewing since I returned from DC. And I was trying to finish in time to listen to Ellison on the radio when I got a call from my son's school.

It was my son's teacher calling because of a little incident she had with my son in her history class. For Woman's History Month they are studying woman leaders, among them Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton. Well, began to tell me that the class was asked how Americans feel about Pelosi being Speaker of the House, and my son raised his hand and said "Ashamed" without hesitation.

I said nothing waiting for her to finish telling me what my son had done wrong. After a long pause she asks: "Are you there, are you listening?"

Me: Yes, I'm here, I was just waiting for you to finish your account so I could respond appropriately.

Teacher: Well, I just want you to know that he was quite insistent and wouldn't change his mind and went as far as calling her inconsiderate. When I asked him why he said to me, "because of what she did to my mommy and to others." I understand that your politics may be different, but we need to teach our children, especially boys, that we need to be proud of all women, especially our women leaders.

Me: [As I exhale slowly gathering patience for this interuption at work] My son has a personal issue with and strong feelings for Ms. Pelosi and her staff. I suspect that it will be a long while before he's able to let them go.

Teacher: What possible personal issues could a 7 yr old child have with the Speaker of the House?

Me: Her staff kept pushing back our meeting into the late afternoon after which they cancelled our meeting, which made me miss my flight home, along with dinner and my bedtime routine with him. We both have a lot of reasons to be angry with her, so I'm not going to convince him to feel otherwise.

Teacher: Uhm, but that's different she's the Speaker of the House, she's dealing with important matters. [Blah, blah, blah...]

Me: And I'm a mother of a 7 year old that doesn't understand what was happening in DC this week that required my presence there. I've taught my son that lateness and rudeness is inexcusable and to tell him their behavior was ok because of their position would negate what we believe in and would create a false standard. All he knows is that his mom didn't come home for dinner, didn't read him a bed time story, and wasn't able to pray with him or hug or kiss him goodnight as she does every night. That, in his world, carries more weight than any of the Speaker's issues.

Teacher: Blah, blah, blah, ..... [as far as I was concerned our conversation was over, but I had to let her finish. Unfortunately it continued beyond what it had to, but since he's going there on a scholarship I have to walk a think line and be on my best behavior. But yes, we all have a lot of reasons to be angry with Pelosi. except my issues go back... way back!]

Posted by: Michele at 12:40 PM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 485 words, total size 3 kb.

1 " I understand that your politics may be different, but we need to teach our children, especially boys, that we need to be proud of all women, especially our women leaders." This sounds to me as if we're supposed to "admire" a woman just because she's a woman. How stupid is that. We don't admire men for being men... There is so much wrong on so many levels with this conversation. (just the fact that she called you!) But the biggie here is that she is saying your son's opinion is invalid because it doesn't conform with hers. He has his reasons, but those reasons aren't good as far as she is concerned. In other words, because he is a boy, he is supposed to parrot the mantra that "all women are wonderful". Thus making him a good person... hogwash! Makes me wonder if she thinks "all men are scum". I wouldn't be surprised. Although it would be instructive to ask her if she's proud of all the men in this country who are in power... if not why not? If we're proud of all the women in power, shouldn't we be proud of all the men too? As for me... I'm proud of your son for standing his ground.

Posted by: Teresa at March 09, 2007 02:28 PM (gsbs5)

2 I'm proud of him too. Doesn't he count as an American? Doesn't his opinion of her count? I agree with Teresa. Since when do we need to be proud of or admire someone because of their sex? What if Pelosi had used s-e-x and not her gender to get where she is? Should we be proud of her then? Or what if she got there lying, cheating, murdering, etc . . . akin to a third world leader - should we be in her thrall then? All this teaches young men is that it is not ok to be a man, but regardless of historical fact if you succeed in your tasks we should be proud of you because you are a woman. As if it is some major accomplishment to get out of the kitchen or bedroom.

Posted by: oddybobo at March 09, 2007 02:43 PM (mZfwW)

3 I applaud your sense of restraint. I am not sure the conversation would have gone as smoothly had I been one of the participants. Respect and honor are things that are earned, not accidenta of birth. I would not have hesitated to inform the teacher that this standard applies to her as well. Your son has certainly earned a measure of respect, as has his mother for raising him right.

Posted by: Stephen Macklin at March 09, 2007 06:57 PM (Z3kjO)

4 Pat yourself on the back for raising a child who can reason on his own. Then hug him and let him know that there are people out here that think he's pretty special. BTW, all I can say about Teresa's comment is BRAVO *standing ovation*!!! That pretty much nails my opinion of this event. Hope you have a great weekend...

Posted by: Lemon Stand at March 09, 2007 08:04 PM (9i141)

5 Y'all need to come south where the teachers won't be quite so liberal. If your son had said that in my class, I would have been high-fiving him. And my phone call to you would be, "Do you know what your adorable son said today???"

Posted by: Mrs. Who at March 09, 2007 11:41 PM (9FXen)

6 Kudos to your son... and you!

Posted by: Jean at March 10, 2007 07:36 AM (YadGF)

7 Teresa - DITTO! Stephen - Ditto again, and a manly chest-bump! (Okay, maybe that's over the top. Nevermind.) And Michele - as for Mrs. Who's comment... Believe her. I've seen/heard her give just such kudos to parents for real! You're doing a fine job. High-five the young'un for me! This reminds me of an 'episode' I had when I happened to notice a new GameBoy game that my stepdaughter was playing. It was "Power Puff Girls: Battle H.I.M." The villain was - of course - male. I asked Mrs. Who - "You don't have a problem with the media teaching misandry to your seven year old daughter?" At the time, she just laughed it off. I continued fitfully ranting, but Mrs. Who just rolled her eyes, "It's just a game." I asked, "Do you really want your sweet daughter following in the footsteps of Gloria Steinem and her ilk? There's a chasm of difference between being 'feminine' and being a man-hating feminist." Mrs. Who still just laughed, telling me I was over-reacting and being silly. Then we noticed (or I pointed out) how frequently PrincessNO took a negative view of male figures in different circumstances. It was more often than not. (I've since attributed Mrs. Who's then P.O.V. to residual effects of her idiot ex and subsequent post-divorce "men-are-scum" phenomena. She eventually came 'round!) That's when we started watching the cartoons that our kids were watching. They're CHOCK-FULL of misandry - not to mention the incredible amount of sexual innuendo. Apparently having cartoon characters deliver humor aimed 'over the heads' of children is designed to make them "more enjoyable for the whole family." All the "violent" Loony Tunes cartoons are gone, and they've remade them into soft-porn, liberal-spewing CRAP. (Think about it: When was the last time you saw Elmer Fudd toting his shotgun?) /tangent - sorry. It happens. A LOT, I'm afraid. One cartoon in particular had 'Taz' in competition with a female character. In the end, Taz lost the bet and was forced into the "realization" and woefully, downtroddenly professed that "girls were BETTER." Not EQUAL... BETTER. That's when we decided it wasn't worth $40 a month to pay for that sewage to be pumped into our house daily, especially with little sponge-brain kids being the inevitable primary consumers. (TV Executives know this too - look at the amount of advertising aimed at the teen, 'tween' and younger crowd.) And do you know what? We haven't missed paid TV programming at all. Well, okay, there is some discomfort over the loss of SciFi channel and Fox News. If I could get just those two without all the rest, I'd be a happy camper. Interesting side-note, misandry is not even in the Firefox default spell-check dictionary... But misogyny *is*. Oh, and if Teacher ever calls again... Give her my number, please. ;->

Posted by: Bitterroot at March 11, 2007 12:29 AM (9FXen)

8 Wowee! You sure hit the jackpot (or jackboot) with that school! I'm still recovering from court-mandated tuition to a liberal private school and that was a waste of 10 years of my life putting on a smiley face when I wanted to heave my Cheerios. Lemme tell ya - Fortunately, through superb parenting and the cluebat of reality my daughter is carrying a 4.5 in High School and has a much more healthy normal life. And she's checking out ROTC for college. Take that, hippies!

Posted by: Cappy at March 13, 2007 07:00 AM (6gy9P)

9 kudos to your son. and also to you.

Posted by: wRitErsbLock at March 13, 2007 12:22 PM (+MvHD)

10 I wonder why she choose those two women leaders for the question. Why no mention of Condi. How about she mention the female troops fighting in Iraq, they are doing more important work then Nancy or Hillary. Good for your son for having his own opinion and not following the sheep.

Posted by: sherlock at March 13, 2007 01:17 PM (THj5I)

11 I love that she AUTOMATICALLY assumed it was about politics and never asked him why. A seven year old!

Posted by: caltechgirl at March 13, 2007 03:52 PM (/vgMZ)

12 Personally I think we need to get rid of Women in History Month, Black History Month and any other month in which a particular ethnic, religious or sexual orientation group is held in greater esteem because of their race, religion or gender. Instead of focusing on what is truly important.. Great People of America... we are adding fuel to the flames of prejudice. If everyone is equal and they are, then no one group should have a "month" or all should. I am proud of the stand that your son took with his class. It shows that he has thought out his opinion instead of parroting what his teacher has told him. And you are absolutely correct in that his opinion has value since his life was turned upside down by the inconsiderate rude act of a "woman" in power.

Posted by: Tink at March 13, 2007 05:13 PM (vfIfd)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

A big number of conservative bloggers, some who attended the recent Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) think so. In fact, they are so outraged by Coulter's use of vitriolic and divisive rhetoric during CPAC, they have called for her exclusion and a tougher stance against such tactics, as they believe its a threat to their political movement. What say you? Where do you stand on the use of name calling and bias language to make a political point and foster further debate? Is it really a victory when you get more media coverage for the reprehensible remarks made by one attendee, than for your entire conference or your political agenda?

Posted by: Michele at 01:48 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 118 words, total size 1 kb.

My day yesterday started out at 5:30am. after having gone to bed around 2:00am. I was busy setting up a pick up schedule and had to email, txt message or call everyone to confirm their pick up time to take them to the voting center, after which I had to get the house spotless to be turned into a mini day care center. I volunteer to help shuttle the elderly & disabled to and from the voting site from 6:45am to 8:00am. Then from 8:00am to 9:15am I open my home to single parents w/toddlers in the neighborhood who need someone to watch the kids while they vote.

Needless to say it was a morning where there was little dialogue between my son and I because things had to get done & he had to help, plus he was going to vote with me for the first time. When I layed out his school uniform and asked him to get dressed he kept delaying and then tried to negotiate out of his uniform, or so I thought. I gave him my no-nonsense look with the "no back talk or negotiation" warning as we had a very tight schedule and he'd be in big trouble. Resigned he put his school uniform on, quickly ate breakfast and off we went. My first group of 9 Seniors were the first people in line. I voted quickly, though angrily, when I saw that for some offices 1 candidate was running on the Republican, Democrat, and Right to Life Party simultaneously. Where on earth is democracy there? At that moment I definitely would have voted for myself via written ballot just out of my constitutional principal, but I was on a time schedule.

On our last shuttle ride home my son said he had a request. I asked what that was and he said, "since there's no school today can I wear my regular clothes". Oh, I felt like such a heel and I apologized profusely while hugging and kissing him. Trying to push my guilt to his advantage he asked if he could also have a popsicle stick when we got home because he was thirsty from all the running around. "Sorry Mr., not a chance.!"

In the hour I hosted daycare I had a total of 12 kids. My day began to peak when a cute tiny 5yr old that I adore walked in and kept staring at me while his mom and I talked. He kept staring at me even as his mother was trying to say goodbye. Finally I squatted down to his level, and with a smile and gentle voice asked why he was staring at me so much, did he like my choker or my earings. He shook his head and finally worked it all out in his head and said to me: "You're pretty!" with such a sweet sincerity that I just had to give him a big kiss on the cheek for starting my day off right. He then ran away from me to the children's table as he wiped the kiss off his cheek. I sighed and reflected on how yet another man was running away from me.

By 10:00am I was back at my desk working like mad. On my way to the copier I passed a collegue who stopped to stare at me forcing me to look at the front of my blouse to make sure my buttons weren't open. Finally he says to me, "You look faaaantastick!" To which I asked in a sweet voice and with a slight smile on a straight face: "As opposed to the rest of the time when you don't say anything because I look like crap?" He was speechless and turning beet red. Me I was laughing on the inside because I knew my point had been brought home. He had gone over board with the exhuberance so he definitely wanted something from me which now he couldn't ask because he realized his charm didn't work on me.

At 1:30 my old boss, Mr. Global IT Director for Division 1, called me to go upto his office for a chat. It had been over a year since I had left him. I didn't really want to take another position, but leave I had to just so I could have my life back. When working for him I worked at times 18 hrs a day. While in his office we chatted for awhile about changes in the dept. structure, personnel and technology. We caught up on the global projects I had managed and on our personal lives. Then suddenly his tone changed. It was the tone that he used during my annual performance reviews, when he cleared his throat a gazillion times trying to find the right words to convey his message. While he's doing this, I'm wondering what time it is because I have to pick up my son at 3:00pm and by now I know I'll be cutting it close.

Suddenly from his mouth I hear: "I think you would be perfect for this new position in London. I'm hoping you'll consider applying for it as you'll have my full support." Then my mind starts racing with questions and objections, and I'm thinking could I raise a happy, healthy, sane child and have a normal life doing RSM's job in London. That's when my cell phone began to go off like crazy and I realized I had 5 min to get into the elevator go down 40 flights, run through the huge lobby & out into the street to pick up my son.

So as calmly as possible I interrupted him, thanked him for the offer, letting him know that I had to leave immediately to pick up my son and asked if we could continue the conversation tomorrow. Luckily my son was late which gave me a few mintues to let it all sink in: living in London, working again in IT, working for one of the best bosses I've ever had... as I sit here writing this all I can muster to think or say is... WOW. And I know the feelings will be short-lived because I don't have enough information to wrap my head around it. Still, it's like finally being asked to the prom. I was never asked to go to the prom, but if I had been asked, I bet you it would feel like this - faaaaantastic.

Anyway, I gotta go to bed. I can't think about this now 'cause I'm dog dead tired!

Posted by: Michele at 01:29 AM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 1096 words, total size 6 kb.

1 Wow. Oh Wow. I know you will make the best decision for you and your son. Oh Wow.

Posted by: Tink at November 08, 2006 08:08 AM (11q5z)

2 I forgot to tell you guys... I went to an all girl's Catholic HS, so I guess it was a good thing I didn't get asked.

Posted by: Michele at November 08, 2006 08:50 AM (V1fde)

3 Whoa, that's just awesome (I think)! Don't you love it when you have chioces and opportunities? And that poor kid. I bet you gave him cooties, didn't you?

Posted by: Ogre at November 08, 2006 10:39 AM (oifEm)

4 Oh WOW! What a wonderful opportunity!! Good for you!

Posted by: Richmond at November 08, 2006 04:11 PM (e8QFP)

5 Cool! I would come to visit.

Posted by: _Jon at November 08, 2006 10:09 PM (uCdAQ)

6 So... wanna go to the prom? :-)

Posted by: Harvey at November 09, 2006 10:54 AM (L7a63)

7 OMG - I am so happy for you! What a day! I know it was yesterday and I'm late getting here because I'm not thinking and hit you yesterday, but forgot to scroll down. *grin* Wow, oh Wow! That is just amazing! How I wish it was me, but if it can't be me, I'm very very glad it's you!

Posted by: Teresa at November 10, 2006 12:36 AM (o4pJS)

8 OUTSTANDING!! You know my rule - never say I wonder if or I wish I had. Do what's best for you and your family. But it does rock bein' asked, doesn't it?!? :-) I'm so happy for you.

Posted by: Tammi at November 11, 2006 07:16 PM (3UQTn)

9 Wow, just wow!

Posted by: oddybobo at November 12, 2006 10:20 AM (awS9g)

10 Okay, why'd ya kiss the little boy and slapdown the full-grown one?? And I think that your idea was wonderful.... next election we'll all write in your name!!!

Posted by: Amy K. at November 12, 2006 06:35 PM (9n3pF)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I hear from news reports that you became very upset with Chris Wallace during an interview when he asked you if you had done all you could on the war on terror.

What Chris seems to have missed and which I remember is that Sunday was the 10th Anniversary of the Khobar Bombing. You remember that one don't you? It was one of many that occurred under your term.

I know you must have been extremely upset with Chris, especially after "The Path of 9/11 pointed out how Sandy Berger, Madeleine Albright and you didnÂ’t go to every length to find the perpetrators of ALL the terrorist attacks during your 8 years in office. And then to read Louis FreehÂ’s article, on the Anniversary of the Khobar Towers bombing, your own appointed investigator of that bombing, piercing the veil of your deceitful revisionist history must have just been too much for you.

Well, Mr. Clinton, your disgraceful execution of office will forever be judged not by the spin you try to portray but on what you did in response to the continual attacks on American citizens and interests abroad. Yes, history will judge you, but it will do so solely on the actions you and those in your administration took or did not take, not on whether Chris Wallace is a conservative and you an immoral liberal. Having lived through this history, I will help others know the truth and remember long and hard every single failed foreign policy and action that brought about the death of my loved ones. But like many of your predecessors, history will judge you with a magnifying glass and a keen eye. For you will be judged, not just by the lack of character and judgment you exhibited during your lifetime, but by the miniscule successes and the massive failures of ALL your actions and inactions in office.

And then sir, you will realize that no amount of lies, deceitful charm will protect you from the American People discovering the truth.

Posted by: Michele at 12:51 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 349 words, total size 2 kb.

Chavez insults for the past 2 days have united members on both sides of the aisle in defending President Bush. Some of the highest ranking Democrats have been quoted as saying:

Charles Rangel: "You don't come into my country, you don't come into my congressional district, and you don't condemn my President."

Senator Charles Schumer: Chavez was "despicable and disgusting"

Former President Clinton: "Obviously, I think he made a mistake."

Reverend Jesse Jackson: [Who was attended the Harlem event] "I urged [Chavez] to stop [his Bush attacks] for his own good."

The NY press has also weighed in on the fray. Today's New York Daily News Front Page headline read "El Loco" and in their page 1 lead told Chavez to ''ZIP IT!'' The New York Post called him a ''JERK!'' and the ''Caracas Crackpot.'' Of
course, the NY Times has simply referred to Chavez as outspoken, minimizing the lengthy barage of insults Chavez has lobbed at our President.

On the other side of the aisle we have:

Governor Pataki: "The best thing he can do is go back to Venezuela and try to provide freedom for his people instead of what he's done here in New York."

Posted by: Michele at 02:53 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 196 words, total size 1 kb.

Today is the opening session of the UN's General Assembly. Yesterday I forgot about how many heads of state come in early for this shindig and I ran into several of them.

Okay guys, get ready to play, let's see if you know any of these peoples names without googling:

- The King of Jordan
- First female African President
- First female head of state of an EU country
And for major bonus points: which nutcracker will get to address the General Assembly tomorrow shortly after Bush. I'll give you a hint: he's repeatedly called for the obliteration of Israel & the anhilation of the Jewish race and their western supporters.

Answers will be in the comments towards the end of the day. I wanted to play this game of Spotting Politicos w/Eric last year when he came to visit but worked for the witch from hell and was having a bad week so I forgot.

Posted by: Michele at 12:00 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 165 words, total size 1 kb.

Why, you may ask, is Russia and China taking North Korea's side? Simple, the same reason they oppose imposing sactions on Iran: money and fear!

Like Iran, North Korea makes considerable purchases of items other countries would not even consider buying from Russia & China adding considerably to each country's revenue.

Then there is the Kim Jong - powder keg factor. Who wants to go against a madman that has weapons that are locked and loaded on his neighbors and can easily be launched against them without provocation.

Kim Jong has tested his missiles just outside Russian, Japanese and Taiwan's airspace without so much as a warning, making dialogue and diplomatic relations tenuous at best. Russia and China have not supported the US on sanctions in the past (like when thousands of North Koreans were dying every day) so this little matter of nuclear/military proliferation, will eventually die a quiet death, as it has in the past, until Kim Jong gets bored again and decides to stir up troupble.

He's like Britney Spears, can't stand not being in the limelight and the center of attention, but hate the negative attention they draw thinking they are undeserving of criticism.

Posted by: Michele at 08:14 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 206 words, total size 1 kb.

This post was birthed in response to blog sis Teresa's post North Korea - Trying to Be Big Man On Campus. Her commentary made me laugh, though I wasn't laughing when I heared the news of the launching. Nope, it pissed me off that this idiot will probably manage to kill lots of his people and his neighbors just to try to show he's got (cough, cough) viable rockets.

To answer Teresa on the distance and capability of these long range missiles: they are second hand, 20 to 30 yr old Russian medium to long range missiles that were sold to the North Korean's (NK's) close to 20 years ago. These missiles were always unreliable, only 1 in 4 ever managed to hit their long range target when they were in the Russian arsenal. Needing to get rid of the old before buying new ones (as stipulated by treaties Kissinger & others brokered in the 70 & 80's), the Russians wound up selling them to the NK's in the late 80's with the UN's blessing. The UN sanctioned the sale because back then China was still a military and political threat to everyone in Asia, including their own allies.

more...

Posted by: Michele at 11:35 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 1042 words, total size 6 kb.

Congressional Quarterly Politics column reports this morning that the RNC brought in $8 million last month and began June with $43.7 million in the bank, while the DNC brought in $5 million and had $10.3 million in the bank.

In related news... in a speech yesterday at the National Press Club, John Edwards was testing the big themes on his road tour to the White House in 2008. The topics ranged from ”a call for eliminating poverty by 2036" to fixing social programs for seniors. [Methinks Edwards is either naive or delusional] A Quinnipiac poll out this morning shows that while 61% of New Yorkers think Rudy Giuliani would make a “great” or “good” president, only 49% of respondents thought Sen. Hillary Clinton would.

Posted by: Michele at 12:02 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 123 words, total size 1 kb.

In an article in the NY Daily News, columnist Goodwin discusses the talk surrounding a possible bid for the Presidency by NYC Mayor, Michael Bloomberg (R)> In it Goodwin says that although Bloomberg “has ventured onto the national stage on gun control, immigration and stem-cell research, he is nobody's fool -- and he knows he doesn't stand a chance of winning the presidency.” … And they're both right; not only does Bloomberg not have the national exposure, he is no Rudy Giuliani.

On Fox News’ O’Reilly Factor last night, political pundit Dick Morris [you remember Dick... he was the advisor to Pres. Clinton who often talked to Bill while shacking up with one of his steady NY call-girls when in town]... well, Dick said that Al Gore is running for President again! Gore denies it now because he “doesn't want to be seen as running while he's putting out this movie. I guess he wants to check the temperature of his political exposure in a few weeks as the furor/excitement/criticism/box office money over the movie dies down. Anyway, Dick's point about Gore is that he really is now the un-Hillary [candidate] of the Democratic primary.” I think Dick thinks Gore has a chance. Unfortunately, he lost my unimaginable vote when he claimed to have invented the internet.

Hmmmmm, Tim Berners-Lee for President? Now that's a candidate I can get behind on!

Posted by: Michele at 12:11 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 211 words, total size 2 kb.

As reported in the White House Bulletin:

All things Presidential: A front-page piece in today’s Washington Post on Sen. Hillary Clinton says she has “has fashioned a political persona that generates intense passions but defies easy characterization.” … An ABC News poll out this weekend shows 54% approving of Sen. Clinton nationally, but 42% disapproving, and 42% saying they would vote against her under all circumstances [ It seems that most NY'ers are in the 54% crowd. This blogger is NOT among them]. … Al Gore’s potential as a 2008 candidate continued to receive press coverage this weekend, including a New York Times piece saying he appears not to be interested [yeah right!]. In a separate NY Times article, columnist Frank Rich says Democrats interest in Gore “says more about the desperation of the Democrats than it does about him.” … In his Time column this week, Joe Klein argues that Illinois Sen. Barack Obama should run in 2008, while the Chicago Tribune reports that fellow Illinoisan Dick Durbin has been encouraging him to do so in private [Obama for President? He's barely out of Senatorial diapers. Several pieces of legislation he proposed have died a very silent and chilly death. Although he's a good orator, he's unfortunately a very inexperienced and isolated senator.]

Posted by: Michele at 12:50 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 167 words, total size 2 kb.

Statements like these from Iran's Interior Ministry, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad don't surprise me in the least. Does it surprise you?

This didn't surprise because they have disregarded all nuclear proliferation regulations and rejected repeated EU & UN requests for meetings to negotiate their proliferation. As per their Minister it is Iran's way of showing the western world and their Asian neighbors to the East they are a true islamic fundamentalist regime that the world will have to reckon with sooner or later (their statements not mine).

So it also not surprising to me that they are harboring 25 top Al Qaeda operatives and Bin Laden's sons? Is it surprising to you?

Posted by: Michele at 01:25 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 127 words, total size 1 kb.

If DC news is not your cup of tea then move on to the next post and read about all the books that are currently being banned or challenged in cities and towns across American. Yes, folks in that list you'll find the threats to freedom and our way of life! [For those that don't know me...please read with an extremely sarcastic tone.]

- Greenspan still sees "froth in housing market." He based his comments, given at the Mortgage Bankers convention, on new data developed by Fed staff economists on increased home values, how much has been extracted in home equity loans, and the latest loan to value ratios.

- President Bush offers continued access to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Yesterday, following a briefing at the Energy Department, President Bush offered further access to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and noted work to open refineries and pipelines, to allow foreign hulls to bring gasoline imports, and to waive EPA blending regs. Mr. Bush concluded with a strong call for conservation by motorists.

- The Former and Current head of FEMA testified today that it has spent $16.0 b. so far. That leaves $46.3 b. to be spent. House Appropriations will begin today three days of hearings on hurricane relief spending starting with FEMA, Homeland Security and HUD tomorrow, the Army Corps of Engineers on Wednesday, and the Transportation Department Thursday. President Bush is readying a third package of rebuilding aid to send to Congress that could exceed that amount. Senator Frist's (R-TN) top budget aide Bill Hoagland told a Washington audience today that federal hurricane relief and rebuilding funding would be closer to $100 b. than to $200 b., which "has no basis in analysis." But who's to know what the cost will be?

- Continuing resolution till November 18th will be enacted by midnight Friday. With only two appropriations bills enacted so far, out of 13, Congress and President Bush have no choice but to enact a continuing resolution. The House has passed all its appropriations, and the Senate has four more to go, and conference committees are working on five. transfer from airport requested via hotel.

- 18 Al Qaeda Operatives Sentenced in Spain. Europe's biggest trial of alledged al Qaeda members to date concluded in Madrid today with sentences ranging from 6 to 27 years in prison. Suspected al Qaeda cell leader Imad Yarkas drew the longest sentence from Spain's High Court, 27 years, for conspiracy and leading a terrorist organization. Yarkas was found guilty of collaborating with the 9/11 plotters, but he was cleared of any specific role in the attacks in NY & DC. The High Court dismissed the most serious charges. Six additional defendants were acquitted of all charges.

So that's all the news I have time to print. Gotta get back to work and do massive amounts of reading today. If you're looking for me I'm the one that is surrounded by mountains of paper. Too bad it's all white, I could use some color!

Posted by: Michele at 09:00 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 501 words, total size 3 kb.