new

old

write me

d*land

recent experiments:

shock and awe indeed. - 2:26 PM , Friday, Sept. 02, 2005

I grow old, but I prefer my trousers unrolled. - 9:30 AM , Monday, Aug. 22, 2005

it's all about the iPod - 10:00 AM , Thursday, Aug. 11, 2005

uncountable in showers of crimson rubies - 4:43 PM , Monday, Jul. 18, 2005

and I know it aches, and your heart it breaks... - 1:12 PM , Friday, Jul. 08, 2005

if you're this close, introduce yourself.

or, leave me a note.

OK, maybe not EVERY book Diane Rehm plugs.

Thursday, Oct. 14, 2004 ... 12:53 PM

Now Playing: Kojo asking for my money.


*~*

OK, um.. did either of them actually answer the question about the flu shots?

Well for one thing, I don't think that either of them owes us an explanation for that. They had little control over it.[1] Which brings me to my next point. W's answer had me boiling. He explains what happened by telling us that "we" kept the contaminated supplies out of the U.S. in fact, I will quote him: "And so we took the right action and didn't allow contaminated medicine into our country." Whuh? Chiron is a British company and its license was suspended by the British version of the FDA. From cnn.com: "Tuesday, British regulators disagreed and suspended Chiron's license for three months, officially prohibiting export of the Fluvirin brand that Chiron manufactures in Liverpool. The sanction means more than a delay, Chiron officials said. The company will ship no Fluvirin anywhere this year ." "We" had nothing to do with that. In fact, what the FDA did was send people over there to see if they could get some vaccine form Chiron anyway.

Grrrrrr. Everything has to be about how he is protecting us from one evil or another, and it�s all crap. He hasn't "protected" us from anything but the truth.

*~*

Now that I've been an Extra Good Citizen and watched all four debates, I'm actually feeling a little less confident about that being the right thing to do. I mean, you always want an informed voter base. But in all of these debates, all four people said lots of things that were half-true, semi-true, and even outright lies. And what disturbs me is that (not being a political encyclopedia) I wouldn't really have known that unless I'd listened to the political pundits on NPR the next day. Now think of all the people who only listened to the sound bites on the news, and don't know which ones were true and which ones were crap. One guy says one thing, the other guy says "he's full of shit," and what have you learned? It's our job to stay informed, but let's be honest�how many people really do?

I don't even know how informed I am. People on the Bush side of things would probably say that everything I hear has a liberal bias because NPR is my primary news source.

I just don�t have a good feeling about this election.

*~*

[1] but that doesn't change the fact that neither of them addressed the actual question.