The Streit’s family dynasty: Passing on the matzo on the Lower East Side
Political chatter... right this way...
only in america
i was talking to jim about the next generation of internet ads that bypass pop up blockers. here are 1, 2 stories about the new methods.
get yer black death, flu microbes. thanks maud
criterion releases dvd of jean renoirs Rules of the Game.
blogging sundance
Boi is no Bao Noodles, nice food but Bao is the dope!!
someone was singing the virtues of cabelas in berks county, pa. he said they had a stream in the store to test out your line for fly fishing. theres a firing range for kids and a 12000 sq ft deer trophy museum. (so that would be a room filled with dead stuffed animals and not trophies that deer have won in competition. )heres their online store.
had a excellent meal at Sugiyama, deep meal, modern kaiseki, kobe rocks, super lobster with uni baked on the roe/green gook, lots of shrooms, tons of texture.....aint no Kai....
90 Points
90 Points
toronto is all fired up. its true, molson is (acapulco) golden.
theres a jewish deli over on grand st near clinton with the unappetizing name of Noahs Ark. (hey, lets eat two of everything!) i checked out their website and found this sample bris catering menu, the idea of which i thought was humorous. i just hope that their luncheon meats are thinly sliced.
goo-goo ga-ga
bush vs press
"...from Bush on down, talking to the press off the record is generally frowned upon and equated with leaking, which is a deadly sin in the Bush White House (unless it is a leak manufactured to advance the President's agenda)."
"...from Bush on down, talking to the press off the record is generally frowned upon and equated with leaking, which is a deadly sin in the Bush White House (unless it is a leak manufactured to advance the President's agenda)."
New Urban News is a professional newsletter for planners, developers, architects, builders, public officials and others who are interested in the creation of human-scale communities.
More of the old news on the Spiral Jetty restoration contraversy.
looks like a building outside my window on allen st. is on fire. i can hear the fire engines coming now.
Yeah, I'm dumping more of my questionable political speculation over here.
Could a democrat attack Bush on Iraqi WMD in this way? Instead of going on about how there aren't any, back up and accept a lot of what the administration said in the run up to war, and then pin them to the wall on the outcome. In other words, something like this:
"But Mr. President, respectfully, we all know there were dangerous weapons in Iraq. You yourself said that there were. Your staff said that there were. Donald Rumsfeld said he knew where they were. Colin Powel gave specific details on stocks of poison gasses. Of course these things were true. My question to you now, Mr. President, is if we knew the weapons were there WHY DID WE FAIL TO SECURE THOSE WEAPONS? Since we know that they did exist, and we now know that we cannot account for them, aren't we to conclude that invading Iraq caused the weapons to fall into unaccounted hands? WHERE ARE THE WEAPONS?"
This seems like a much more powerful attack than merely saying that there never were any weapons. They would have no avenue (that I can see) to reply. They could spin their way out of it in the press, but in a one on one debate, what could Bush say? He can't say they never existed. And he can't say they have been located. He'd be stuck. And the attack could seem respectful which I think is very important if we want to suck votes over to the other side.
What am I missing?
Could a democrat attack Bush on Iraqi WMD in this way? Instead of going on about how there aren't any, back up and accept a lot of what the administration said in the run up to war, and then pin them to the wall on the outcome. In other words, something like this:
"But Mr. President, respectfully, we all know there were dangerous weapons in Iraq. You yourself said that there were. Your staff said that there were. Donald Rumsfeld said he knew where they were. Colin Powel gave specific details on stocks of poison gasses. Of course these things were true. My question to you now, Mr. President, is if we knew the weapons were there WHY DID WE FAIL TO SECURE THOSE WEAPONS? Since we know that they did exist, and we now know that we cannot account for them, aren't we to conclude that invading Iraq caused the weapons to fall into unaccounted hands? WHERE ARE THE WEAPONS?"
This seems like a much more powerful attack than merely saying that there never were any weapons. They would have no avenue (that I can see) to reply. They could spin their way out of it in the press, but in a one on one debate, what could Bush say? He can't say they never existed. And he can't say they have been located. He'd be stuck. And the attack could seem respectful which I think is very important if we want to suck votes over to the other side.
What am I missing?
