This evening's headlines as they appear on the Drudge Report....I'll stick with this horse for now, he's on a roll.
US STOCKS END FIRST POSITIVE YEAR SINCE '99...
Most States No Longer Facing Budget Deficits...
New Jobless Claims Lowest of Bush Tenure...
Wednesday, December 31, 2003
James Zogby decides that the Bush administration manipulates news to suit it's interests. Now, it's not news to anyone that each Administration broadcasts only that which will show them in a good light, but it takes some skill to create an argument which has little to no merit.
Lest anyone forget the power of incumbency, President George W. Bush delivered a few reminders in the past few weeks. The capture of Saddam Hussein and the announcement that Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi had agreed to open his country to weapons inspections demonstrated that ability of the occupant of the White House to generate positive and transformative news.
So...apparently there's no difference between doing positive things (which I assume is good) and generating positive news stories (which is the same as manipulating the news, which is bad). Now that's a Catch-22!
The other irony, is that this supposed Arab-American feels comfortable criticizing the news apparatus in the U.S. in a news source from Saudi Arabia, which is not known form it's freedom of the press. What was his motive for contributing this piece? Will Arabs feel more sympathy or hate for the American people who can't see how ignorant they really are?
I also always enjoy (whether from the left or the right) anyone who claims to be the only person in America not duped by the media.
Lest anyone forget the power of incumbency, President George W. Bush delivered a few reminders in the past few weeks. The capture of Saddam Hussein and the announcement that Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi had agreed to open his country to weapons inspections demonstrated that ability of the occupant of the White House to generate positive and transformative news.
So...apparently there's no difference between doing positive things (which I assume is good) and generating positive news stories (which is the same as manipulating the news, which is bad). Now that's a Catch-22!
The other irony, is that this supposed Arab-American feels comfortable criticizing the news apparatus in the U.S. in a news source from Saudi Arabia, which is not known form it's freedom of the press. What was his motive for contributing this piece? Will Arabs feel more sympathy or hate for the American people who can't see how ignorant they really are?
I also always enjoy (whether from the left or the right) anyone who claims to be the only person in America not duped by the media.
Monday, December 29, 2003
This is pretty unusual for a mainstream generally non-poltical comic strip. Check out this "Pearls Before Swine" strip from 12/28 that describes a family's over a suicide bombing.
The Archbishop of York has some harsh words for Tony Blair regarding his decision to go into Iraq. He urges people to "spend more time praying for Tony Blair". Part of the Archbishop's reasoning for thinking Blair needs help is that he seemed to attack only one bad guy, therefore the war was illegitimate.
Referring to Iraq, he said: "We still have not found any weapons of mass destruction anywhere. Are we likely to find any? Does that alter the view as to whether we really ought to have mounted the invasion or not?
"Undoubtedly, a very wicked leader has been removed, but there are wicked leaders in other parts of the world."
Can someone please explain to me the moral basis for this argument based on Christian theology? I mean, why give hunger relief to Ethiopians when there are other countries where people are starving? Right?
Referring to Iraq, he said: "We still have not found any weapons of mass destruction anywhere. Are we likely to find any? Does that alter the view as to whether we really ought to have mounted the invasion or not?
"Undoubtedly, a very wicked leader has been removed, but there are wicked leaders in other parts of the world."
Can someone please explain to me the moral basis for this argument based on Christian theology? I mean, why give hunger relief to Ethiopians when there are other countries where people are starving? Right?
Saturday, December 27, 2003
Until recently, I thought that reports of this subtle type of bias were perhaps biased in and of themselves. But when it's so easy to find...take these two recent NY Times headlines:
Israeli Troops Kill Palestinian in West Bank Clash
Suicide Attacker Kills 4 in Blast at Tel Aviv Bus Stop
Notice how in the first article the perpetrators (Israelis) and the victim (Palestinian) are clearly pointed out in the headline. The second headline could be Slavs killing Vietnamese - you wouldn't know from the headline that a Palestinian terrorist killed any Israelis.
Israeli Troops Kill Palestinian in West Bank Clash
Suicide Attacker Kills 4 in Blast at Tel Aviv Bus Stop
Notice how in the first article the perpetrators (Israelis) and the victim (Palestinian) are clearly pointed out in the headline. The second headline could be Slavs killing Vietnamese - you wouldn't know from the headline that a Palestinian terrorist killed any Israelis.
It's always upsetting when this type of thing happens where you grew up. Technically, I grew up in the town next door, but even so...from Pearl River in Rockland County, NY. They still actually call this town "Pearly White". Not many minorities there.
Damaged menorah brings support
Damaged menorah brings support
Tuesday, December 23, 2003
Ah-nold is getting into the Jewish thing with Chabad. Here's a picture of the Governator doing the hora!
I'd like to place a phone call to the Oxford English Dictionary and propose that they use this example to define avarice - from an article about the new upscale Lake Las Vegas communities.
More often than not, however, any resemblance to the Mediterranean is accidental. Lois and Don Borsack's 10,000-square-foot $3.5 million Tuscan-style villa, for example, has 22 televisions, seven electric-flame fireplaces and a dog park with built-in misters not to mention an elevator with paw-activated buttons.
Instead of a formal dining room, a motorized glass table sits in the middle of the living area; it is raised and lowered at the push of a button, to accommodate cocktails or dinner. There are four kitchens, although the house has only three bedrooms. "The ironic part is, I don't remember the last time we cooked," said Ms. Borsack, the retired owner of a chain of luggage stores.
You know I'll accept the doggie elevator as an extravagant convenience. But 22 TVs! Four kitchens and they don't cook!
Did I mention the sin of pride as well by having the balls to advertise their disgusting waste of money in a newspaper read by over a million people? I'm almost thinking of joining the Socialist Workers Party.
And here's the kicker, this family made their money by selling their company, El Portal Luggage (a business owned by their parents/grandparents since 1936), to Wilson's Leather in 2000 which turned around and closed all the stores a couple of years later. Who knows how many hundreds of people lost their jobs so that the Borsacks could have their doggie elevator.
Congratulations Lois and Don!
More often than not, however, any resemblance to the Mediterranean is accidental. Lois and Don Borsack's 10,000-square-foot $3.5 million Tuscan-style villa, for example, has 22 televisions, seven electric-flame fireplaces and a dog park with built-in misters not to mention an elevator with paw-activated buttons.
Instead of a formal dining room, a motorized glass table sits in the middle of the living area; it is raised and lowered at the push of a button, to accommodate cocktails or dinner. There are four kitchens, although the house has only three bedrooms. "The ironic part is, I don't remember the last time we cooked," said Ms. Borsack, the retired owner of a chain of luggage stores.
You know I'll accept the doggie elevator as an extravagant convenience. But 22 TVs! Four kitchens and they don't cook!
Did I mention the sin of pride as well by having the balls to advertise their disgusting waste of money in a newspaper read by over a million people? I'm almost thinking of joining the Socialist Workers Party.
And here's the kicker, this family made their money by selling their company, El Portal Luggage (a business owned by their parents/grandparents since 1936), to Wilson's Leather in 2000 which turned around and closed all the stores a couple of years later. Who knows how many hundreds of people lost their jobs so that the Borsacks could have their doggie elevator.
Congratulations Lois and Don!
I have seen several letters to the editor today basically stating that the fact that the government raised the alert level to Orange means that we're not safer and that Howard Dean was correct in saying that the country is not safer with Saddam Hussein having been captured. (Which is just another way of saying "Bush lied"). Here are some excerpts:
From the Dallas Morning News:
Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean is being loudly attacked for suggesting that the capture of Saddam Hussein hasn't made us any safer.
Then I pick up my morning newspaper yesterday and read that the homeland security threat assessment has been raised to orange (the second-highest level) and that Tom Ridge says we're now in greater danger from terrorist attack than at any time since 9-11.
So, let me see if I have this straight. Howard Dean is wrong because capturing someone who didn't have anything to do with 9-11 and who didn't even have any weapons of mass destruction makes us safer, even though we are now in greater danger from the people who did attack us?
Sorry, but I think Dr. Dean has got it right. We aren't going to be safer until we finish the job with Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda. The invasion of Iraq was an unrelated, bloody and expensive diversion from our real goal.
Lori Senesac, Dallas
----------------------------------------------------------------
From the New York Times:
Re "Terror Alert Is Raised to `High,' Increasing Scrutiny of Travelers" (front page, Dec. 22):
If, as President Bush claims, the world is safer now that Saddam Hussein is in custody, then why has he raised the nation's terror alert from elevated to high? It is disappointing to me that such questions of Mr. Bush go unasked, and unacceptable that they go unanswered.
Over the past week, Mr. Bush's pundits have slammed Howard Dean for stating that the world is no safer after Saddam Hussein's capture than it was before. Yet, based on this weekend's developments, isn't it clear that Mr. Bush agrees?
Shame on us, as Americans, for allowing an administration to continually say one thing and do another!
SUZANNE RUSSIAN
Metuchen, N.J., Dec. 22, 2003
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
First of all, no one was claiming that the U.S. would be safer from specific threats by all global terrorist organizations immediately after the capture of Saddam Hussein. This may be a bad analogy, but 60 years after Hitler committed suicide, there are thousands of neo-Nazis and many acts of violence and murder have been committed in Hitler's name or honor. His country's surrender did not also mean the beginning of a peaceful world without war. That does not mean that the world is not better off without Hitler.
And you know what, maybe we are a little less safe in the short term. But does that invalidate the long-term struggle to replace tyranny and terrorism with freedom and debate in the Middle East? Americans as individuals sure weren't safer the days after we declared war on Japan and Germany, and over 400,000 died in the following 3 1/2 years in helping to defeat the forces of evil.
Secondly, it is funny how the Bush critics are using his own creation, the terror alert system, against him. If the Bush administration did not create the alert system as a safety measure how would the Bush-haters know when it is less "safe" in order to criticize the president? That's like criticizing the states that have developed the Amber Alert system for not doing more to prevent child abduction, the proof being that they have to use the Amber Alert system.
Finally, here's another analogy - there are probably more automobile accidents than ever before (over 6 million in 2001) - but tens of thousands of lives have been saved because we are prepared for them with seat belts, airbags, crumple zones, etc. We're safer not because the driving environment has changed so much - it's that our little metal capsules that we travel in are designed better against catastrophe. Well due to the Bush administrations efforts, we have been trying to design this capsule that we call America a little better - while at the same time trying to eliminate the outside forces that would try to do us harm. Will we ever know that we are safer or are allocating our resources appropriately - I'm not sure. But at least we're doing something, and not waiting for the United Nations or the EU to come protect us.
From the Dallas Morning News:
Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean is being loudly attacked for suggesting that the capture of Saddam Hussein hasn't made us any safer.
Then I pick up my morning newspaper yesterday and read that the homeland security threat assessment has been raised to orange (the second-highest level) and that Tom Ridge says we're now in greater danger from terrorist attack than at any time since 9-11.
So, let me see if I have this straight. Howard Dean is wrong because capturing someone who didn't have anything to do with 9-11 and who didn't even have any weapons of mass destruction makes us safer, even though we are now in greater danger from the people who did attack us?
Sorry, but I think Dr. Dean has got it right. We aren't going to be safer until we finish the job with Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda. The invasion of Iraq was an unrelated, bloody and expensive diversion from our real goal.
Lori Senesac, Dallas
----------------------------------------------------------------
From the New York Times:
Re "Terror Alert Is Raised to `High,' Increasing Scrutiny of Travelers" (front page, Dec. 22):
If, as President Bush claims, the world is safer now that Saddam Hussein is in custody, then why has he raised the nation's terror alert from elevated to high? It is disappointing to me that such questions of Mr. Bush go unasked, and unacceptable that they go unanswered.
Over the past week, Mr. Bush's pundits have slammed Howard Dean for stating that the world is no safer after Saddam Hussein's capture than it was before. Yet, based on this weekend's developments, isn't it clear that Mr. Bush agrees?
Shame on us, as Americans, for allowing an administration to continually say one thing and do another!
SUZANNE RUSSIAN
Metuchen, N.J., Dec. 22, 2003
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
First of all, no one was claiming that the U.S. would be safer from specific threats by all global terrorist organizations immediately after the capture of Saddam Hussein. This may be a bad analogy, but 60 years after Hitler committed suicide, there are thousands of neo-Nazis and many acts of violence and murder have been committed in Hitler's name or honor. His country's surrender did not also mean the beginning of a peaceful world without war. That does not mean that the world is not better off without Hitler.
And you know what, maybe we are a little less safe in the short term. But does that invalidate the long-term struggle to replace tyranny and terrorism with freedom and debate in the Middle East? Americans as individuals sure weren't safer the days after we declared war on Japan and Germany, and over 400,000 died in the following 3 1/2 years in helping to defeat the forces of evil.
Secondly, it is funny how the Bush critics are using his own creation, the terror alert system, against him. If the Bush administration did not create the alert system as a safety measure how would the Bush-haters know when it is less "safe" in order to criticize the president? That's like criticizing the states that have developed the Amber Alert system for not doing more to prevent child abduction, the proof being that they have to use the Amber Alert system.
Finally, here's another analogy - there are probably more automobile accidents than ever before (over 6 million in 2001) - but tens of thousands of lives have been saved because we are prepared for them with seat belts, airbags, crumple zones, etc. We're safer not because the driving environment has changed so much - it's that our little metal capsules that we travel in are designed better against catastrophe. Well due to the Bush administrations efforts, we have been trying to design this capsule that we call America a little better - while at the same time trying to eliminate the outside forces that would try to do us harm. Will we ever know that we are safer or are allocating our resources appropriately - I'm not sure. But at least we're doing something, and not waiting for the United Nations or the EU to come protect us.
Monday, December 22, 2003
An article in today's Clarin (Argentina) reflects the continuing economic problems in Israel and the better situation in Argentina.
Cientos de argentinos regresan al pais por la crisis en Israel - Hundreds of Argentines go back home because of the crisis in Israel
(My translation below):
Felisa Schwalb is 58 years old. She arrived in Israel in October 2002 as part of a wave of immigrants that, until that year, included 6,300 Argentines. Now she feels disillusioned. She and her husband had work in Argentina: Felisa was a massage therapist and her husband made and sold home and bath products. "If we decide to come to Israel it is for our grandchildren and our three children. But it turns out the children are unhappy and the saddest part is that, despite our love for the place, we can't be against our son's decision to go back to Argentina".
Felisa is one of the Argentines - between 600 and 1,000 according to sources - that, having immigrated to Israel to escape the crisis in Argentina, have now begun to return to their country of origin due to the lack of work and the insecurity in the area due to the "Intifada" or Palestinian rebellion.
It's about immigrants of Jewish origin that arrived in Israel taking advantage of the Law of Return and that couldn't deal with the problems of the Israeli economic crisis it was reported yesterday in the newspaper Ma'ariv.
The people that have returned to Argentina are part of the contingent of 7,000 Argentines that arrived in Israel in the last two years, as part of a vast program of the authorities of the Jewish state. To attract them, they were given financial help over and above the normal benefits given to Jewish immigrants.
Daniel, a 35 year-old with his tickets for his return to Argentina in his hand, told Clarin: " I though it would be difficult, but it was worse than I thought."
Like his mother, Daniel sees the danger of bombings as secondary. "The main problem is the lack of work", he maintains. The young immigrant clarifies by saying that "in Israel there are good people, but there are also some bad ones". He alluded in this way to employers who took advantage of immigrants like himself to lower costs and increase profits. Beaten down by these distasteful events and pained to leave his siblings and parents in Israel, Daniel explains how he couldn't get integrated and in perfect Hebrew says: "Here I'm not Daniel, but my identity number".
Israel has brought in more than one million immigrants in the last three years, the majority from the ex-Soviet Union, although the armed conflict with the Palestinians since September 2000 has dealt a fatal blow to the economy of this country, that is living through it's worst recession in 53 years.
According to Ma'ariv, the rightist government led by Ariel Sharon has not answered the needs of Latin Americans for work, a situation that was studied today in a special session of the parliamentary Commission on Immigration.
The newspaper highlighted that the conditions leading to the decision of hundreds of immigrants to return is the profound economic recession in Israel and the bettering of the same in Argentina since Nestor Kirchner's arrival as president.
"we go from one job to another for minimum wage. And that's when there is work because there are times when we don't even have that", according to an Argentina immigrant, who is married and the father of three children, that in Buenos Aires was the owner of a clothing store. According to this immigrant, who lives in northern Israel and asked not to be identified, "I was here for months without telling my parents in Buenos Aires that I didn't have a job, because I was ashamed."
Many Argentine immigrants are used to saying that "if we have to be poor, we prefer to be poor in Argentina, where at least we understand the language".
Rabbi Mauricio Balter, head of the Argentine community in Kiryat Bialik, told Clarin that "the situation in Israel is very difficult. Today - heexplainss - jobs areheldd by Russian immigrants, in groups that are difficult to penetrate.". And therefore the pain continues for those who return: "In Argentina at least we know how to get by in poverty".
Cientos de argentinos regresan al pais por la crisis en Israel - Hundreds of Argentines go back home because of the crisis in Israel
(My translation below):
Felisa Schwalb is 58 years old. She arrived in Israel in October 2002 as part of a wave of immigrants that, until that year, included 6,300 Argentines. Now she feels disillusioned. She and her husband had work in Argentina: Felisa was a massage therapist and her husband made and sold home and bath products. "If we decide to come to Israel it is for our grandchildren and our three children. But it turns out the children are unhappy and the saddest part is that, despite our love for the place, we can't be against our son's decision to go back to Argentina".
Felisa is one of the Argentines - between 600 and 1,000 according to sources - that, having immigrated to Israel to escape the crisis in Argentina, have now begun to return to their country of origin due to the lack of work and the insecurity in the area due to the "Intifada" or Palestinian rebellion.
It's about immigrants of Jewish origin that arrived in Israel taking advantage of the Law of Return and that couldn't deal with the problems of the Israeli economic crisis it was reported yesterday in the newspaper Ma'ariv.
The people that have returned to Argentina are part of the contingent of 7,000 Argentines that arrived in Israel in the last two years, as part of a vast program of the authorities of the Jewish state. To attract them, they were given financial help over and above the normal benefits given to Jewish immigrants.
Daniel, a 35 year-old with his tickets for his return to Argentina in his hand, told Clarin: " I though it would be difficult, but it was worse than I thought."
Like his mother, Daniel sees the danger of bombings as secondary. "The main problem is the lack of work", he maintains. The young immigrant clarifies by saying that "in Israel there are good people, but there are also some bad ones". He alluded in this way to employers who took advantage of immigrants like himself to lower costs and increase profits. Beaten down by these distasteful events and pained to leave his siblings and parents in Israel, Daniel explains how he couldn't get integrated and in perfect Hebrew says: "Here I'm not Daniel, but my identity number".
Israel has brought in more than one million immigrants in the last three years, the majority from the ex-Soviet Union, although the armed conflict with the Palestinians since September 2000 has dealt a fatal blow to the economy of this country, that is living through it's worst recession in 53 years.
According to Ma'ariv, the rightist government led by Ariel Sharon has not answered the needs of Latin Americans for work, a situation that was studied today in a special session of the parliamentary Commission on Immigration.
The newspaper highlighted that the conditions leading to the decision of hundreds of immigrants to return is the profound economic recession in Israel and the bettering of the same in Argentina since Nestor Kirchner's arrival as president.
"we go from one job to another for minimum wage. And that's when there is work because there are times when we don't even have that", according to an Argentina immigrant, who is married and the father of three children, that in Buenos Aires was the owner of a clothing store. According to this immigrant, who lives in northern Israel and asked not to be identified, "I was here for months without telling my parents in Buenos Aires that I didn't have a job, because I was ashamed."
Many Argentine immigrants are used to saying that "if we have to be poor, we prefer to be poor in Argentina, where at least we understand the language".
Rabbi Mauricio Balter, head of the Argentine community in Kiryat Bialik, told Clarin that "the situation in Israel is very difficult. Today - heexplainss - jobs areheldd by Russian immigrants, in groups that are difficult to penetrate.". And therefore the pain continues for those who return: "In Argentina at least we know how to get by in poverty".
Sunday, December 21, 2003
In the spirit of American independence, General Wesley Clark seems to be reaching back to the infamous "Don't Tread on Me" motto.
Better not mess with Clark
Better not mess with Clark
I wonder if this is actually true - and if so, who did he mean by "we"?
Bush declares: "We must get rid of Arafat"
Bush declares: "We must get rid of Arafat"
Saturday, December 20, 2003
Eevn if no one is reading this, and the thought isn't original, there's just something I have to say.
24 is one of the best TV shows ever. We're 1/3 of the way through the second season after becoming "catch-up" fans.
Kiefer Sutherland is my hero.
24 is one of the best TV shows ever. We're 1/3 of the way through the second season after becoming "catch-up" fans.
Kiefer Sutherland is my hero.
Friday, December 19, 2003
This is just too funny. Even though I can't verify that the lead quote comes from Michael Moore, it's obviously what every anti-war person was pushing for.
I've been pretty mean to Michael Moore lately, but I think he's finally changed my mind:
"Saddam Hussein is a brutal dictator, and I hope he's removed as soon as possible. But nonviolently."
Good idea! First we'll coax Saddam out of his bunker with a trail of delicious candy. Then, once his belly is full and he's all sleepy and happy, we'll calmly explain that we don't approve of what he's been doing and it's not very nice and we wish he'd stop. And he'll be like, "Whoa, I never thought of it that way. You guys are my friends! I like you!" And then everybody will hug and cry, and then get a little embarrassed about crying, and then make some jokes to cover up being embarrassed. And then a beautiful rainbow will appear, and a shy unicorn will walk down it, and Saddam will ride the unicorn to the North Pole, and he'll spend the rest of his life helping Santa make wonderful toys for all the good little girls and boys, and there'll be hot chocolate, and, and, and, and nobody will ever ever die again for any reason ever. THE END
Thanks to Jackie's Au Currant blog for the link.
I've been pretty mean to Michael Moore lately, but I think he's finally changed my mind:
"Saddam Hussein is a brutal dictator, and I hope he's removed as soon as possible. But nonviolently."
Good idea! First we'll coax Saddam out of his bunker with a trail of delicious candy. Then, once his belly is full and he's all sleepy and happy, we'll calmly explain that we don't approve of what he's been doing and it's not very nice and we wish he'd stop. And he'll be like, "Whoa, I never thought of it that way. You guys are my friends! I like you!" And then everybody will hug and cry, and then get a little embarrassed about crying, and then make some jokes to cover up being embarrassed. And then a beautiful rainbow will appear, and a shy unicorn will walk down it, and Saddam will ride the unicorn to the North Pole, and he'll spend the rest of his life helping Santa make wonderful toys for all the good little girls and boys, and there'll be hot chocolate, and, and, and, and nobody will ever ever die again for any reason ever. THE END
Thanks to Jackie's Au Currant blog for the link.
I'm not sure exactly where I stand on this, but there's a big to-do in my local school district about a kid who handed out candy canes with a note about their origin which is supposedly based on Christian worship. The school is using various rules (no passing notes in class and no candy distribution) to get around the issue of whether this would be considered proselytizing or not.
As an important step in our recovery from 9/11, I have to post this link for the historical record.
Architects Unveil Revised Freedom Tower Design
Architects Unveil Revised Freedom Tower Design
Once again, PETA takes to child abuse to get it's message across. They have taken to handing out comic books to children with the title "Your Mommy Kills Animals".
PETA activists - including cuddly, costumed raccoons and foxes - are making guest appearances outside performances of The Nutcracker across the country this holiday season with a cheeky message of compassion. As children arrive to see the "Dance of the Sugarplum Fairy," some will be unaware that their mothers are already starring in a real-life horror story! PETA will be there to greet any fur-clad moms and their children with their newest anti-fur leaflet-PETA Comics presents..."Your Mommy Kills Animals!"
Kids will see the bloody truth behind their moms’ pretentious pelts. Accompanied by graphic photographs of skinned carcasses and animals languishing on fur farms, children will read: "Lots of wonderful foxes, raccoons, and other animals are kept by mean farmers who squish them into cages so small that they can hardly move. They never get to play or swim or have fun. All they can do is cry-just so your greedy mommy can have that fur coat to show off in when she walks the streets."
Why do these stupid, stupid people have to do such offensive things to get their otherwise valid point across?
PETA activists - including cuddly, costumed raccoons and foxes - are making guest appearances outside performances of The Nutcracker across the country this holiday season with a cheeky message of compassion. As children arrive to see the "Dance of the Sugarplum Fairy," some will be unaware that their mothers are already starring in a real-life horror story! PETA will be there to greet any fur-clad moms and their children with their newest anti-fur leaflet-PETA Comics presents..."Your Mommy Kills Animals!"
Kids will see the bloody truth behind their moms’ pretentious pelts. Accompanied by graphic photographs of skinned carcasses and animals languishing on fur farms, children will read: "Lots of wonderful foxes, raccoons, and other animals are kept by mean farmers who squish them into cages so small that they can hardly move. They never get to play or swim or have fun. All they can do is cry-just so your greedy mommy can have that fur coat to show off in when she walks the streets."
Why do these stupid, stupid people have to do such offensive things to get their otherwise valid point across?
Thursday, December 18, 2003
The Escapist comes to life! If you've read The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay by Michael Chabon (which wo the Pulitzer several years ago), you will be happy to know that the fictitious comic book series around which the book revolves is actually going to be published.
It seems that Jewish oriented comics are starting to become big business - or at lease some kind of business.
As the Forward article also states - "the Magen Davids are out from underneath the Spandex costumes. Comic book legend Joe Kubert has created a graphic novel about the Warsaw Ghetto uprising, various X-Men flaunt their Jewish identities and master storyteller Will Eisner has produced "Fagin the Jew."
It seems that Jewish oriented comics are starting to become big business - or at lease some kind of business.
As the Forward article also states - "the Magen Davids are out from underneath the Spandex costumes. Comic book legend Joe Kubert has created a graphic novel about the Warsaw Ghetto uprising, various X-Men flaunt their Jewish identities and master storyteller Will Eisner has produced "Fagin the Jew."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)