|
 |
Friday, January 25, 2008 |
House GOP's retreat funded by lobbyists.. This weekend, House Republicans are gathering at the Greenbrier resort in West Virginia to have a conversation about cutting earmarks. As GOP members gather to talk about how to cut ties with lobbyist money, Ben Pershing notes that their weekend retreat is being partly funded by lobbyists:
As Bush stood in the banquet room addressing the assembled lawmakers, projected onto a giant screen next to him were the words “Congressional Institute.” [..]
The group is run by a high-powered board of Republican lobbyists, all of whom presumably value the entre into Congressional affairs the institute provides.
[Think Progress]
3:57:44 PM 
|
|
Navy Resumes Use of Sonar off California. The Christian Science Monitor's Gordon Lubold reports "The Navy aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln and its accompanying ships began an exercise Wednesday that allows the aircraft carrier's strike group to use sonar to practice detecting submarines in the waters near San Diego before the ships deploy overseas.... Environmental groups expect a federal judge to rule against the Navy in the coming days, nullifying an exemption signed by Bush last week that environmentalists believe was unconstitutional." [t r u t h o u t]
3:48:08 PM
|
|
Fox News: Bush Is âo[breve]Really Reflecting On His Place In History,âo[dot accent] Trying To ‘Equate Himself’ With Lincoln. Fox News reporter Bret Baier “was granted unprecedented access by George W. Bush” to put together a one hour documentary that reflects back on his presidency. The documentary will air this Sunday night.
Baier previewed his documentary — “George W. Bush: Fighting to the Finish” — on Fox News this afternoon. He said that what surprised him from the interview was the President’s repeated efforts to link himself to Abraham Lincoln:
We talked a lot about President Lincoln. And there’s going to be a lot of people out there who watch this hour and say, is he trying to equate himself with Lincoln?
I tell you what — he thinks about Lincoln and the tough times that he had during the Civil War. 600,000 dead. The country essentially hated him when he was leaving office.
And the President reflects on that. This is a President who is really reflecting on his place in history.
Watch it:
During Bush’s 2006 summer vacation in Crawford, the White House eagerly informed the media that Bush was going to be spending his time reading two historical books on the Lincoln presidency: “Lincoln: A Life of Purpose and Power,” by Richard Carwardine, and “Lincoln’s Greatest Speech: The Second Inaugural,” by Ronald C. White Jr.
The list of conservatives who have sought to frame Bush as Lincoln is long; it includes Newt Gingrich, John Gibson, David Brooks, and Rudy Giuliani.
Writing in Salon, Garret Epps responded to efforts to link Bush to Lincoln, writing “You, sir, are no Abe Lincoln“:
On the personal level, Lincoln had none of Bush’s obstinacy and egotism. He scorned yes men, and surrounded himself with Cabinet officials better known than he was, refusing to purge even those actively working against his own political interests. […]
Most important, Lincoln was a lawyer. It is hard to find any sign that Lincoln thought himself above the law. He had none of Bush’s scorn for procedures and rights. […]
George W. Bush is Lincoln the way Dan Quayle is Jack Kennedy.
Note to Bret Baier: Lincoln wasn’t “hated” when he left office. He was assassinated just after being re-elected by an overwhelming margin.
Digg It!
[Think Progress]
2:00:08 PM
|
|
Gretchen Rubin: Have you ever had to struggle to resist buying some enticing gewgaw as a surprise for your child?.
One challenge of parenthood is setting limits on myself.
For her birthday, I gave the Big Girl a giant book of optical illusions. She loved the book--pored over it, looked at it with her friends, kept it out on her beside table. I was so pleased with myself for choosing it.
Yesterday I was in a drug store that had a rack of cheap children's books. I spotted a book of optical illusions, and almost bought it for her. Then I stopped myself.
She already had a book with 200 illusions; this book probably didn't have much new. But even beyond that--more of something you love isn't always better.
In fact, as I thought about it, I wondered if having two books of optical illusions might, in fact, dim her pleasure in the first book. It wouldn't seem as magical. Also, she'd be more likely to get tired of the subject.
I remember that when the Big Girl was in nursery school, the school head told a story about a four-year-old who had a toy car he loved. He played with it constantly. Then when his grandmother came to visit, she bought him ten toys cars, and he stopped playing with the cars altogether.
"Why don't you play with your cars?" she asked. "You loved your blue car so much."
"But I can't love lots of cars," he answered.
It's so easy to make the mistake of thinking that if you have something you love, or if there's something you want, that you'll be happier with more of it.
As Barry Schwartz argues in his fascinating book, The Paradox of Choice: Why More is Less , one way to keep yourself from becoming jaded to pleasurable experiences and delightful treats is to keep them as rare indulgences.
That's because one of the significant factors in happiness is the hedonic treadmill, or hedonic adaptation.
People are adaptable. We quickly adjust to a new life circumstance--for better or worse--and consider it normal. Although this helps us when our situation worsens, it means that when circumstances improve, we soon become hardened to new comforts or privileges.
It's so much fun to bring pleasure to children. The smallest things thrill them. I'll never forget the look on the Little Girl's face when I bought her a Little Mermaid electric toothbrush at Target. "For me, Mommy? Is it FOR ME?" She literally clasped it to her heart.
But like other pleasures, the joy of giving a present to a child -- as well as their joy in getting a present -- will become dull if indulged in too often. Not to mention all the other obvious reasons why plying your kids with stuff is a bad idea.
If you'd like to read more about happiness, check out Gretchen's daily blog, The Happiness Project, and join the Happiness Project group on Facebook to swap ideas.
 [The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com]
1:53:35 PM
|
|
Bush mistakenly compares himself to a horse bandit.. As Texas governor, President Bush admired a 1916 painting by W.H.D. Koehner hanging in his office. In 1995, Bush wrote a memo to his Texas staff describing the artwork:
 [T]he painting is based upon the Charles Wesley hymn “A Charge to Keep I Have”. I am particularly impressed by the second verse of this hymn. The second verse goes like this: “To serve the present age, my calling to fulfill; O may it all my powers engage to do my Master’s will.” […]
When you come into my office, please take a look at the beautiful painting of a horseman determinedly charging up what appears to be a steep and rough trail. This is us.
But in his new book, The Bush Tragedy, Jacob Weisberg explains that the painting has nothing to do with the hymn and “circuit-riders who spread Methodism across the Alleghenies in the nineteenth century.” It actually depicts a horse bandit:
The artist, W.H.D. Koerner, executed it to illustrate a Western short story entitled “The Slipper Tongue,” published in The Saturday Evening Post in 1916. The story is about a smooth-talking horse thief who is caught, and then escapes a lynch mob in the Sand Hills of Nebraska. The illustration depicts the thief fleeing his captors.
Scott Horton has more.
[Think Progress]
1:18:05 PM
|
|
Memo To Media: Jon Stewart Likes Accuracy, Too. Does the media exaggerate sometimes? Obviously. Can it be damaging? If you're the ex-president wading vigorously into the fray of your wife's presidential run and everyone's nattering over your temper and the damage to your legacy, then presumably yes, insofar as it buttresses that speculation.
The clip of Bill Clinton and CNN's Jessica Yellin from earlier this week is one such example, as Jon Stewart astutely points out in this clip:
Stewart notes that Clinton's reaction was far from the explosive anger most of the media portrayed it as (here's a rule of thumb: When there is no finger-pointing, he's not too fussed. There was no finger pointing with that reporter in San Fran, either). Here at ETP we noted that too, wondering how our take could have differed so from that of other journalists (including Yellin, whose impressions were no doubt informed by being on the other side of a tense exchange with a pretty commanding man).
We're pleased that Stewart vindicated our observations.
 [The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com]
11:22:12 AM
|
|
© Copyright 2008 Patricia Thurston.
|
|
|
