- Radmilla Cody: Two Cultures, One Voice (May 10, 2010)
- Enrico Caruso: And Confessions of an Operaholic (May 17, 2010)
- Lydia Mendoza: The First Lady of Tejano (May 24, 2010)
- Janis Joplin: The Queen of Rock (June 7, 2010)
- Sandy Denny: Mercurial Queen of British Folk Rock (June 14, 2010)
- Donny Hathaway: Neglected Heart of Soul (June 21, 2010)
- Lauren Hill: The Many Voices of... (June 28, 2010)
- Fairuz: Lebanon's Voice of Hope (July 12, 2010)
- John McCormack: The Charming Irish Tenor (July 19, 2010)
- Khaled: The King of Rai (July 26, 2010)
- Biggie Smalls: The Voice that Influenced a Generation (August 2, 2010)
- Bjork: A Celestial Voice (August 7, 2010)
- Twinkie Clark: Riffing on Gospel (August 23, 2010)
- Ima Thomas: The Soul Queen of New Orleans (August 23, 2010)
- Freddie Mercury: Rock 'N' Roll's Humble Showman (August 30, 2010)
Monday, August 30, 2010
NPR's 50 Great Voices Series
As noted below, NPR is doing a series on great voices in recorded music over the decades. One episode airs each week. Here's who they've covered so far:
Freddie Mercury
NPR is doing a series on great voices across the decades. Today aired an episode about Freddie Mercury. Adam is one of the people interviewed. He talks about his study of Freddie's voice. He demonstrates a little something about the long-held "wooooorrlld" in We Are the Champions.
Re: This just in
I hope that for today at least that percentage is somewhat better than 99.9% of 1.5B.
I'm not really inclined to jump in to anything GZ Mosque related due to deep ambivalence.
BUT, I met a jenuwine Islamophobe the other day. She's an occasional bridge partner of my mom's and she stopped by after they last played.
She lived in Rhodesia, Libya, Saudi Arabia and Egypt during the 60s, 70s and 80s and had the misfortune of witnessing a couple of behandings.
Granted seeing that could color anybody's opinion but she loathes anything Muslim of any stripe.
To make things a little more interesting, she's also an atheist, Randian libertarian.
I'm not really inclined to jump in to anything GZ Mosque related due to deep ambivalence.
BUT, I met a jenuwine Islamophobe the other day. She's an occasional bridge partner of my mom's and she stopped by after they last played.
She lived in Rhodesia, Libya, Saudi Arabia and Egypt during the 60s, 70s and 80s and had the misfortune of witnessing a couple of behandings.
Granted seeing that could color anybody's opinion but she loathes anything Muslim of any stripe.
To make things a little more interesting, she's also an atheist, Randian libertarian.
Judea Pearl has an explanation
While I await Steph's explanation of what she means by "unconstitutional" reasons, here's Judea's Pearl take:
I have been trying hard to find an explanation for the intense controversy surrounding the Cordoba Initiative, whereby 71 percent of Americans object to the proposed project of building a mosque next to Ground Zero.
I cannot agree with the theory that such broad resistance represents Islamophobic sentiments, nor that it is a product of a “rightwing” smear campaign against one imam or another.
Americans are neither bigots nor gullible.
Deep sensitivity to the families of 9/11 victims was cited as yet another explanation, but this too does not answer the core question.
If one accepts that the 19 fanatics who flew planes into the Twin Towers were merely self-proclaimed Muslims who, by their very act, proved themselves incapable of acting in the name of “true Islam,” then building a mosque at Ground Zero should evoke no emotion whatsoever; it should not be viewed differently than, say, building a church, a community center or a druid shrine.
A more realistic explanation is that most Americans do not buy the 19 fanatics story, but view the the 9/11 assault as a product of an anti- American ideology that, for good and bad reasons, has found a fertile breeding ground in the hearts and minds of many Muslim youngsters who see their Muslim identity inextricably tied with this anti-American ideology.
THE GROUND Zero mosque is being equated with that ideology. Public objection to the mosque thus represents a vote of no confidence in mainstream American Muslim leadership which, on the one hand, refuses to acknowledge the alarming dimension that anti-Americanism has taken in their community and, paradoxically, blames America for its creation.
The American Muslim leadership has had nine years to build up trust by taking proactive steps against the spread of anti-American terror-breeding ideologies, here and abroad.
Evidently, however, a sizable segment of the American public is not convinced that this leadership is doing an effective job of confidence building.
In public, Muslim spokespersons praise America as the best country for Muslims to live and practice their faith. But in sermons, speeches, rallies, classrooms, conferences and books sold at those conferences, the narrative is often different. There, Noam Chomsky’s conspiracy theory is the dominant paradigm, and America’s foreign policy is one long chain of “crimes” against humanity, especially against Muslims.
Affirmation of these conspiratorial theories sends mixed messages to young Muslims, engendering anger and helplessness: America and Israel are the first to be blamed for Muslim failings, sufferings and violence.
Terrorist acts, whenever condemned, are immediately “contextually explicated” (to quote Tariq Ramadan); spiritual legitimizers of suicide bombings (e.g. Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi of Qatar) are revered beyond criticism; Hamas and Hizbullah are permanently shielded from the label of “terrorist.”
Overall, the message that emerges from this discourse is implicit, but can hardly be missed: When Muslim grievance is at question, America is the culprit and violence is justified, if not obligatory.
True, we have not helped Muslims in the confidence-building process. Treating homegrown terror acts as isolated incidents of psychological disturbances while denying their ideological roots has given American Muslim leaders the illusion that they can achieve public acceptance without engaging in serious introspection and responsibility sharing for allowing victimhood, anger and entitlement to spawn such acts.
The construction of the Ground Zero mosque would further prolong this illusion.
If I were New York’s Mayor Michael Bloomberg, I would reassert Muslims’ right to build the Islamic center and the mosque, but I would expend the same energy, not one iota less, in trying to convince them to put it somewhere else, or replace it with a community-managed all-faiths center in honor of the 9/11 victims.
Fellow Muslim Americans will benefit more from co-ownership of consensual projects than sole ownership of confrontational ones.
[Emphasis added]
I have been trying hard to find an explanation for the intense controversy surrounding the Cordoba Initiative, whereby 71 percent of Americans object to the proposed project of building a mosque next to Ground Zero.
I cannot agree with the theory that such broad resistance represents Islamophobic sentiments, nor that it is a product of a “rightwing” smear campaign against one imam or another.
Americans are neither bigots nor gullible.
Deep sensitivity to the families of 9/11 victims was cited as yet another explanation, but this too does not answer the core question.
If one accepts that the 19 fanatics who flew planes into the Twin Towers were merely self-proclaimed Muslims who, by their very act, proved themselves incapable of acting in the name of “true Islam,” then building a mosque at Ground Zero should evoke no emotion whatsoever; it should not be viewed differently than, say, building a church, a community center or a druid shrine.
A more realistic explanation is that most Americans do not buy the 19 fanatics story, but view the the 9/11 assault as a product of an anti- American ideology that, for good and bad reasons, has found a fertile breeding ground in the hearts and minds of many Muslim youngsters who see their Muslim identity inextricably tied with this anti-American ideology.
THE GROUND Zero mosque is being equated with that ideology. Public objection to the mosque thus represents a vote of no confidence in mainstream American Muslim leadership which, on the one hand, refuses to acknowledge the alarming dimension that anti-Americanism has taken in their community and, paradoxically, blames America for its creation.
The American Muslim leadership has had nine years to build up trust by taking proactive steps against the spread of anti-American terror-breeding ideologies, here and abroad.
Evidently, however, a sizable segment of the American public is not convinced that this leadership is doing an effective job of confidence building.
In public, Muslim spokespersons praise America as the best country for Muslims to live and practice their faith. But in sermons, speeches, rallies, classrooms, conferences and books sold at those conferences, the narrative is often different. There, Noam Chomsky’s conspiracy theory is the dominant paradigm, and America’s foreign policy is one long chain of “crimes” against humanity, especially against Muslims.
Affirmation of these conspiratorial theories sends mixed messages to young Muslims, engendering anger and helplessness: America and Israel are the first to be blamed for Muslim failings, sufferings and violence.
Terrorist acts, whenever condemned, are immediately “contextually explicated” (to quote Tariq Ramadan); spiritual legitimizers of suicide bombings (e.g. Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi of Qatar) are revered beyond criticism; Hamas and Hizbullah are permanently shielded from the label of “terrorist.”
Overall, the message that emerges from this discourse is implicit, but can hardly be missed: When Muslim grievance is at question, America is the culprit and violence is justified, if not obligatory.
True, we have not helped Muslims in the confidence-building process. Treating homegrown terror acts as isolated incidents of psychological disturbances while denying their ideological roots has given American Muslim leaders the illusion that they can achieve public acceptance without engaging in serious introspection and responsibility sharing for allowing victimhood, anger and entitlement to spawn such acts.
The construction of the Ground Zero mosque would further prolong this illusion.
If I were New York’s Mayor Michael Bloomberg, I would reassert Muslims’ right to build the Islamic center and the mosque, but I would expend the same energy, not one iota less, in trying to convince them to put it somewhere else, or replace it with a community-managed all-faiths center in honor of the 9/11 victims.
Fellow Muslim Americans will benefit more from co-ownership of consensual projects than sole ownership of confrontational ones.
[Emphasis added]
This just in
About 1.5 BILLION Muslims did nothing violent today. Or yesterday. Or the day before that . . .
Imagining with reason
Since [9/11], we have learned that the radical ideology behind 9/11 is not quite as alien as we thought. Some portion of the American Muslim community - presumably small, but we don't know how small - is drawn to it.
Moreover, what looks like a considerable portion of those who hold themselves out (and are held out by the MSM) as leaders of American Muslims refuse to disassociate themselves from terrorist groups. They don't countenance al Qaeda, though they do blame America for that outfit's terrorist acts. But they won't repudiate other bloody terrorists, notably Hamas.
Thus, while only the most highly informed Americans probably could have imagined terrorist plotting or even pro-terrorist rhetoric in an American place of worship back in 2001, many can imagine it now, and with reason.
Sunday, August 29, 2010
Agility training: Tracy Sklenar
I’ve now had two episodes of having my mind blown about dog training. The first was the first time I saw free-shaping demonstrated. (We’ve talked about free-shaping here several times.) The second was last weekend. I audited one day of a weekend course given by Tracy Sklenar on handling skills for agility. Tracy is a nationally-known expert who has competed with her own dogs at world championship levels.
Before I describe what I learned, though, you need a little background. Before I started agility training, the only agility competition I’d seen was the very high level competition that gets television coverage. I was amazed at two things: that a dog can be trained to weave in and out of poles and that a dog can be trained to run across a teeter totter. While these are the most challenging obstacles to master, teaching a dog these maneuvers is a piece of cake compared to what the core of the training is about. The real challenge is “handling” which is communicating to your dog where they’re supposed to go as they run the course and for this communication to be timed right andclear made clear so that the dog can run the course as fast as possible without making mistakes.
What I’ve been taught to do and what I’ve been doing to date has been pointing at obstacles and calling its name as I run the course (“Jump!” “Tunnel!” “Teeter!”). Tracy Sklenar teaches that you should instead only point and call out the names of obstacles in specific circumstances, and never point or name obstacles when the obstacles are on a line that you’re already running or a gentle arc. So that seems impossible, right? How will the dog know where to go if you don’t point at things or call out obstacles?
She teaches that your dog should have two modes when running a course: extension (running all out) and collection (wherein your dog slows, gathers its feet and gets its balance to be able to turn or jump). She teaches that you cue extension entirely through the way you move your own body. It needs to look to the dog like you are running all out. You should be in a leaning-forward posture and should pump your arms and take big steps. If you don’t have room to run all out, then fake it, taking high steps, rather than long ones. Your dog, partly as a result of practicing this but largely as a result of what he/she has observed about how humans run, will understand that this means “run as fast as possible along a generally straight or gently-curved line, taking any obstacles in this line. If I need you to turn, I will let you know.” By not using your arm when you’re running on straight lines your dog doesn’t have to turn his head to focus on your arm and can confidently run straight ahead.
To cue the dog to collect, you use a deceleration cue. The “decel” cue is to stand straight up and put out an arm or finger. At all times when running agility, you should be watching your dog, but you may need to be especially intense about it (i.e. turn your shoulders toward the dog, lower your chin to your shoulder or chest so that your face is square to them) during a decel cue.
I tried this with Karma at practice this week. Even though we’d never practiced running without pointing/naming, we didn’t have a single miscue when running in extension mode. This was completely amazing to me.
Lots more for another day.
Before I describe what I learned, though, you need a little background. Before I started agility training, the only agility competition I’d seen was the very high level competition that gets television coverage. I was amazed at two things: that a dog can be trained to weave in and out of poles and that a dog can be trained to run across a teeter totter. While these are the most challenging obstacles to master, teaching a dog these maneuvers is a piece of cake compared to what the core of the training is about. The real challenge is “handling” which is communicating to your dog where they’re supposed to go as they run the course and for this communication to be timed right and
What I’ve been taught to do and what I’ve been doing to date has been pointing at obstacles and calling its name as I run the course (“Jump!” “Tunnel!” “Teeter!”). Tracy Sklenar teaches that you should instead only point and call out the names of obstacles in specific circumstances, and never point or name obstacles when the obstacles are on a line that you’re already running or a gentle arc. So that seems impossible, right? How will the dog know where to go if you don’t point at things or call out obstacles?
She teaches that your dog should have two modes when running a course: extension (running all out) and collection (wherein your dog slows, gathers its feet and gets its balance to be able to turn or jump). She teaches that you cue extension entirely through the way you move your own body. It needs to look to the dog like you are running all out. You should be in a leaning-forward posture and should pump your arms and take big steps. If you don’t have room to run all out, then fake it, taking high steps, rather than long ones. Your dog, partly as a result of practicing this but largely as a result of what he/she has observed about how humans run, will understand that this means “run as fast as possible along a generally straight or gently-curved line, taking any obstacles in this line. If I need you to turn, I will let you know.” By not using your arm when you’re running on straight lines your dog doesn’t have to turn his head to focus on your arm and can confidently run straight ahead.
To cue the dog to collect, you use a deceleration cue. The “decel” cue is to stand straight up and put out an arm or finger. At all times when running agility, you should be watching your dog, but you may need to be especially intense about it (i.e. turn your shoulders toward the dog, lower your chin to your shoulder or chest so that your face is square to them) during a decel cue.
I tried this with Karma at practice this week. Even though we’d never practiced running without pointing/naming, we didn’t have a single miscue when running in extension mode. This was completely amazing to me.
Lots more for another day.
I KNEW that Republicans/conservatives were mean, stupid, and evil.
Krauthammer:
And now the mosque near ground zero. The intelligentsia is near unanimous that the only possible grounds for opposition is bigotry toward Muslims. This smug attribution of bigotry to two-thirds of the population hinges on the insistence on a complete lack of connection between Islam and radical Islam, a proposition that dovetails perfectly with the Obama administration's pretense that we are at war with nothing more than "violent extremists" of inscrutable motive and indiscernible belief. Those who reject this as both ridiculous and politically correct (an admitted redundancy) are declared Islamophobes, the ad hominem du jour.
It is a measure of the corruption of liberal thought and the collapse of its self-confidence that, finding itself so widely repudiated, it resorts reflexively to the cheapest race-baiting (in a colorful variety of forms). Indeed, how can one reason with a nation of pitchfork-wielding mobs brimming with "antipathy toward people who aren't like them" - blacks, Hispanics, gays and Muslims - a nation that is, as Michelle Obama once put it succinctly, "just downright mean"?
The Democrats are going to get beaten badly in November. Not just because the economy is ailing. And not just because Obama overread his mandate in governing too far left. But because a comeuppance is due the arrogant elites whose undisguised contempt for the great unwashed prevents them from conceding a modicum of serious thought to those who dare oppose them.
Friday, August 27, 2010
Tracy Jordan's repressed childhood memories
And now for something completely different . . .
On the rerun of 30 Rock that aired last night (Season 4, Episode 21), Tracy Morgan's character, Tracy Jordan, visited his childhood home and was flooded with repressed childhood memories. It's essentially a list of some of the best "we were so poor" jokes ever written. Tracy's delivery, of course, made them all the more funny.
As transcribed by Everything Tracy Jordan Said:
On the rerun of 30 Rock that aired last night (Season 4, Episode 21), Tracy Morgan's character, Tracy Jordan, visited his childhood home and was flooded with repressed childhood memories. It's essentially a list of some of the best "we were so poor" jokes ever written. Tracy's delivery, of course, made them all the more funny.
As transcribed by Everything Tracy Jordan Said:
It’s all coming back to me, oh my God.
I slept on an old dog bed stuffed with wigs.
I watched a prostitute stab a clown.
Our basketball hoop was a rib cage! A RIB CAGE!!!
Why did you bring me here? I blocked all this stuff out for a reason. Oh, Lord. Some guy with dreads electrocuted my fish!
All my life I’ve tried to forget the things I’ve seen. a crackhead breast-feeding a rat, a homeless man cooking a Hot Pocket on a third rail of the G train! The G train, Nermal!
I’ve seen a blind guy bite a police horse.
A puppy committed suicide after he saw our bathroom.
I once bit into a burrito and there was a child’s shoe in it.
I’ve seen a hooker eat a tire.
A pack of wild dogs took over and successfully ran a Wendy’s.
The sewer people stole my skateboard.
The projects I lived in were named after Zachary Taylor, generally considered to be one of the worst presidents of all time.
I once saw a baby give another baby a tattoo! They were very drunk!
Thoughts on the Ahem discussion
In the comments of Steph's Ahem post, SupraLuxe and I had an exchange that didn't go well. I was all set to write a snarky, blazing Fisk and in fact started something yesterday morning but got bogged down in diversions and formatting chores before I had to get B to the bus stop.
After thinking about it for a day, I don't want to do that. I'd rather make just a couple of comments.
First, when I told SupraL that Freereplublic and World Net Daily were NOT "leading conservative websites," he took offense. It was not my intention to criticize SuperL's research skills or his choice of sources. However, SupraL's characterization of the Freepers and WND as "leading conservative websites" told me (1) that he hasn't spent much time looking at conservative websites, and (2) he thinks conservatives are crazy. (Note for SupraL: Until fairly recently, I was a hard-core lefty. I proudly called myself a socialist, which lefties seldom do these days, even if they are. I KNEW that Republicans/conservatives were mean, stupid, and evil.) I don't expect that anything SupraL reads here or on any conservative website will change his mind about any of the topics we discuss. But to the extent that SupraL is curious about what conservatives think, I wanted to steer him away from the Freepers and WND and to a place where conservative thoughts are expressed sanely and intelligently; NRO is one of those, there are many others.
Second, a note to SupraL on argument. When in the course of a discussion/argument you find yourself questioning the motivation or character or sanity of your opponent, you are engaging in an ad hominem attack, and it generally means you have run out of thoughtful things to say on the subject. Ad hominem attacks are fun (I know because I do it all the time*) but rarely productive if your goal is a meaningful discussion.
*See, for instance, in the same comments, where I told Steph she was "beyond the bend."**
**But she provocated me.
After thinking about it for a day, I don't want to do that. I'd rather make just a couple of comments.
First, when I told SupraL that Freereplublic and World Net Daily were NOT "leading conservative websites," he took offense. It was not my intention to criticize SuperL's research skills or his choice of sources. However, SupraL's characterization of the Freepers and WND as "leading conservative websites" told me (1) that he hasn't spent much time looking at conservative websites, and (2) he thinks conservatives are crazy. (Note for SupraL: Until fairly recently, I was a hard-core lefty. I proudly called myself a socialist, which lefties seldom do these days, even if they are. I KNEW that Republicans/conservatives were mean, stupid, and evil.) I don't expect that anything SupraL reads here or on any conservative website will change his mind about any of the topics we discuss. But to the extent that SupraL is curious about what conservatives think, I wanted to steer him away from the Freepers and WND and to a place where conservative thoughts are expressed sanely and intelligently; NRO is one of those, there are many others.
Second, a note to SupraL on argument. When in the course of a discussion/argument you find yourself questioning the motivation or character or sanity of your opponent, you are engaging in an ad hominem attack, and it generally means you have run out of thoughtful things to say on the subject. Ad hominem attacks are fun (I know because I do it all the time*) but rarely productive if your goal is a meaningful discussion.
*See, for instance, in the same comments, where I told Steph she was "beyond the bend."**
**But she provocated me.
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Curious
I'm curious to know whether my Republican blog brothers regard Sarah Palin's success in helping candidates get elected as a good thing for your party.
Emerson's tapes
My post "Imam Rauf to be exposed..." linked to Ace's post, which linked to a post on Weasel Zippers, which linked to the original post on Pam Geller's Atlas Shrugged. If you go to the original post on Atlas Shrugged and read since then, you'll find the tapes. I haven't read most of it, but what I have read you will not find controversial and will probably agree with. To you it won't be any big deal, and certainly no expose. Others, including me, will disagree with you.
How's that for sourcing?
How's that for sourcing?
Tapes
Any sign of the tapes yet? How long does it take to upload 13 hours worth of recordings? It's been almost a week. Maybe we could all chip in to buy Steve Emerson a faster internet connection.
Here's my prediction: there's nothing clearly problematic on those tapes (assuming there are tapes at all). If there were anything offensive in the tapes, the tapes would be published already.
Here's my prediction: there's nothing clearly problematic on those tapes (assuming there are tapes at all). If there were anything offensive in the tapes, the tapes would be published already.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Ahem
Haven't there been some revelations about Imam Rauf's nefarious connections that you want to share, Michael? I rely on you for such news, so I was disappointed to have to get it from Jon Stewart.
I think maybe NOW I'm opposed to the building of the mosque because of its frightening connections to Fox News.
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| The Parent Company Trap | ||||
| ||||
Monday, August 23, 2010
Tags
Can I talk you gentlemen into tagging your own posts from now on? (You're also welcome to go back and tag historical posts. I went back as far as 2/19/09.)
I started the tagging project because I wanted to find all the book posts. Because they don't necessarily contain the word "book", there's no way to find them easily.
There are tags for the broad topics of: Economics, Politics, Religion, Books, Music (Other than Adam), Movies, Food, Dramatic Life Events. If that's all you use, it'd be something. Pixels are free, though, so feel free to include everything you'd ever want to use to find something. Also, I see tags as an opportunity for editorial comment. Feel free to create tags.
With regard to names, I've included people's first names and have not included titles. The result is that you can find them under their first name in the alphabetical list of tags.
Tip: Blogger interprets a comma as the end of one tag and the start of another. Thus, if you tried to tag something with "Lambert, Adam", it would bear two tags, one for Adam and one for Lambert.
Tag away.
Update moments later: Also, consider adding tags to reflect what's in the comments.
I started the tagging project because I wanted to find all the book posts. Because they don't necessarily contain the word "book", there's no way to find them easily.
There are tags for the broad topics of: Economics, Politics, Religion, Books, Music (Other than Adam), Movies, Food, Dramatic Life Events. If that's all you use, it'd be something. Pixels are free, though, so feel free to include everything you'd ever want to use to find something. Also, I see tags as an opportunity for editorial comment. Feel free to create tags.
With regard to names, I've included people's first names and have not included titles. The result is that you can find them under their first name in the alphabetical list of tags.
Tip: Blogger interprets a comma as the end of one tag and the start of another. Thus, if you tried to tag something with "Lambert, Adam", it would bear two tags, one for Adam and one for Lambert.
Tag away.
Update moments later: Also, consider adding tags to reflect what's in the comments.
Sunday, August 22, 2010
What if...
A friend poses the following: Imagine that there really were these fundamentalist Christian terror cells all over the United States, as the Department of Homeland Security imagines. Let’s say a group of five of these terrorists hijacked a plane, flew it to Mecca, and plowed it into the Kaaba.
Now let’s say a group of well-meaning, well-funded Christians — Christians whose full-time job was missionary work — decided that the best way to promote healing would be to pressure the Saudi government to drop its prohibition against permitting non-Muslims into Mecca so that these well-meaning, well-funded Christian missionaries could build a $100 million dollar church and community center a stone’s throw from where the Kaaba used to be — you know, as a bridge-building gesture of interfaith understanding.
What do you suppose President Obama, Mayor Bloomberg, the New York Times, and other Ground Zero mosque proponents would say about the insensitive, provocative nature of the proposal?
Do you think the State Department would make the leader of the Christian missionaries a special emissary and send him to represent the United States on diplomatic business overseas?
What do you suppose the Saudi reaction would be?
What do you suppose those ecumenical GZ mosque proponents at Hamas would say?
What do you suppose Pope Benedict and other Christian leaders would say?
What do you suppose imam Feisal Rauf and his friends at CAIR, the Islamic Society of North America, the International Institute of Islamic Thought, and the various other Muslim Brotherhood affiliates would say?
How would building the church/community center in Mecca affect Saudi Arabia’s standing in imam Rauf’s Sharia Index Project?
Play Date
Mom wanted to play hookie (sp?) from church today so it's a ROAD TRIP!!! Ok, less a road trip and more of a play date to Nacogdoches.
Internet Mysteries
Now that I've been pulled back in, how do they do this?
I get letters in my email addressed to my late father. Dad never darkened a computer keyboard in his life unless one counts his ancient HP calculator that cost about $300 in 1972. He certainly never got on the internet and never even saw my computer.
Two outfits email me constantly: a pool supply company and the AARP. A copy of the latter's "webletter" came this morning.
How do they do this? I do use Mom's cable modem and wireless router. I'm pretty sure she's never been to either site.
I know I've never been to either site (until today when I clicked on the AARP note to get the link). And before there are any snide remarks, I did not do an internet search for "Sexual Fantasies over 45" or any related topic.
I get letters in my email addressed to my late father. Dad never darkened a computer keyboard in his life unless one counts his ancient HP calculator that cost about $300 in 1972. He certainly never got on the internet and never even saw my computer.
Two outfits email me constantly: a pool supply company and the AARP. A copy of the latter's "webletter" came this morning.
How do they do this? I do use Mom's cable modem and wireless router. I'm pretty sure she's never been to either site.
I know I've never been to either site (until today when I clicked on the AARP note to get the link). And before there are any snide remarks, I did not do an internet search for "Sexual Fantasies over 45" or any related topic.
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Reading to kids
Since Michael and I are on the topic of dads reading to kids and since we've been talking about my dad's reading tastes, I'll just share a bit about my dad reading to me when I was little.
I would, of course, want him to read Green Eggs and Ham or something like that to me. I would get my book and climb into his lap. He'd open my book and begin:
Half a league, half a league,
Half a league onward,
All in the valley of Death
Rode the six hundred...
I'd whine in exasperation, "DAAAAAADDYYYYYY, that's not how it goes."
He'd say, "Oh, I was on the wrong page.
"Forward, the Light Brigade!"
Was there a man dismay'd?
Not tho' the soldier knew
Someone had blunder'..."
Me: DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADDYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!! Read it RIGHT"
Dad: Just listen:
Cannon to right of them,
Cannon to left of them,
Cannon in front of them
Volley'd and thunder'd;
Me: MOOOMMMMYYYYYY!!! Daddy won't read it right.
He thought this exchange was hilarious and the madder I got the harder he laughed.
Yes, he knew many poems, or parts thereof, by heart, including Tennyson's Charge of the Light Brigade.
In the end, we'd often compromise and he'd read The Duel by Eugene Field or some Kipling.
In spite of our differences, which in later years were a bigger deal than getting him to read what I wanted to hear, I'm appreciative of the really cool stuff he exposed me to.
I would, of course, want him to read Green Eggs and Ham or something like that to me. I would get my book and climb into his lap. He'd open my book and begin:
Half a league, half a league,
Half a league onward,
All in the valley of Death
Rode the six hundred...
I'd whine in exasperation, "DAAAAAADDYYYYYY, that's not how it goes."
He'd say, "Oh, I was on the wrong page.
"Forward, the Light Brigade!"
Was there a man dismay'd?
Not tho' the soldier knew
Someone had blunder'..."
Me: DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADDYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!! Read it RIGHT"
Dad: Just listen:
Cannon to right of them,
Cannon to left of them,
Cannon in front of them
Volley'd and thunder'd;
Me: MOOOMMMMYYYYYY!!! Daddy won't read it right.
He thought this exchange was hilarious and the madder I got the harder he laughed.
Yes, he knew many poems, or parts thereof, by heart, including Tennyson's Charge of the Light Brigade.
In the end, we'd often compromise and he'd read The Duel by Eugene Field or some Kipling.
In spite of our differences, which in later years were a bigger deal than getting him to read what I wanted to hear, I'm appreciative of the really cool stuff he exposed me to.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
