Go Trojans!
(I figure if you can't defeat the Imperial Cult, you might as well join it).
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, January 4th, 2006 at 6:34 pm and is filed under Main.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
January 4th, 2006 at 7:42 pm
Everyone loves a parade!
January 4th, 2006 at 8:58 pm
Go Trojans!
Thanks, but I’ll stick to Lifestyles or Durex . . . :-[
January 4th, 2006 at 10:39 pm
Fight on.
(for old SC
our team fights on
to vic-to-ry!
Our al-
ma mater dear
looks up to you;
fight on and win for old SC!
Fight on to victory!
Fight on!!!)
And all that.
Unfortunately, the Trojans just lost in the last 19 seconds, 41-38. Vince Young ran eight yards for the winning touchdown. He’s quite the dude.
Sucks.
Great game, though.
January 4th, 2006 at 11:11 pm
Trojans? Who they? I thought I was rooting for the Bruins.
It WAS a great game.
January 5th, 2006 at 8:06 am
Hook ‘em!
http://www.utexas.edu/inside_ut/postcards/graphics/large/campus/hookem.html
(Best with sound, and give it about 10 seconds to cycle.)
January 5th, 2006 at 8:29 am
All my exes live in Texas, by the way. It is a state I dearly love.
January 5th, 2006 at 8:54 am
I thought only two things came out of Texas?
And know one here appears to be bovine.
January 5th, 2006 at 11:38 am
Cenzo….
Oh PUL-EEEASE! As IF!
Now if you want to see a REAL mascot….!
http://www.usc.edu/student-affairs/IMREC/spirit/traveler/home.html
NOTE: Best viewed while clicking “Tribute to Troy” music link at the website below
http://www.usc.edu/about/usc_basics/
************************************
(Yes, I am bitter. Thank you for asking.)
January 5th, 2006 at 11:47 am
Ooops. Make that Cenizo. Sorry, Dan, my post game angst affected my spelling.
January 5th, 2006 at 4:38 pm
I guess song girl alumna never die.
January 5th, 2006 at 9:28 pm
I’m mostly kidding. (Mostly being the operative word here.) It was the kind of game it should have been. I’d have preferred if SC would have won, but it was much better to see two strong teams looking evenly matched on the field—not just in the press. Unlike last year’s Orange Bowl that also, by all rights, SHOULD’VE been a great game, but was a so sadly one-sided that it wasn’t even fun to gloat to my O.U.-supporting friends.
(Disturbingly enough, I seem to know an inordinate number of people who can hum “Boomer Sooner†on command. I have no adequate explanation for this.)
January 6th, 2006 at 6:19 am
This is OT so I’m going to put it at the tail of the football thread (where’ Woody?)
A New York Times story that made my jaw drop – Bush rounds up all of these “elder statesmen” to consult on Iraq and…what happens – 5-10 minutes of discussion.
I don’t know what turns my stomach more….the gullibility of folks who would show up for this or the arrogance of the foreign policy team most unfortunate ratio of competence vs. hubris in my memory.
Bush and Former Cabinet Members Discuss Topic No. 1: Iraq
The president promised to “take to heart” suggestions on Iraq he heard from ex-secretaries of defense and state.
By DAVID E. SANGER
Published: January 5, 2006
WASHINGTON, Jan. 5 – Colin Powell said nothing – a silence that spoke volumes to many in the White House today.
His predecessor, Madeleine Albright, was a bit riled after hearing an exceedingly upbeat 40-minute briefing to 13 living former secretaries of state and defense about how well things are going in Iraq. Saying the war in Iraq was “taking up all the energy” of President Bush’s foreign policy team, she asked Mr. t Bush whether he had let nuclear programs in Iran and North Korea spin out of control, and Latin America and China policy suffer by benign neglect.
“I can’t let this comment stand,” Mr. Bush shot back, telling Ms. Albright and the rare assembly of her colleagues, who reached back to the Kennedy White House, that his administration “can do more than one thing at a time.”
The Bush administration, the president insisted, had “the best relations of any country with Japan, China and Korea,” and active programs to win alliances around the world.
That was, according to some of the participants, one of the few moments of heat during an unusual White House effort to bring some of its critics into the fold and give a patina of bipartisan common ground to the strategy that Mr. Bush has laid out in recent weeks for Iraq.
But if it was a bipartisan consultation, as advertised by the White House, it was a brief one. Mr. Bush allowed 5 to 10 minutes this morning for interchange with the group – which included three veterans of another difficult war, the one in Vietnam: Robert S. McNamara, Melvin R. Laird and James R. Schlesinger. Then the entire group was herded the Oval Office for what he called a “family picture.”
Those who wanted to impart more wisdom to the current occupants of the White House were sent back across the hall to meet again with Stephen J. Hadley, the national security adviser, and Gen. Peter Pace, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. But, as several of the participants noted, by that time Mr. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld had gone on to other meetings.
When cameras were in the room, though, Mr. Bush was appreciative. “I’m most grateful for the suggestions that have been given,” he said. “We take the advice, we appreciate your experience and we appreciate you taking the time out of your day.” (snip)
January 6th, 2006 at 6:20 am
uh…”the foreign policy team *with the* most unfortunate ratio of competence vs. hubris in my memory.”
January 6th, 2006 at 6:58 am
Also, a rhetorical Q for PfromM, which I should have asked days ago and didn’t because I’m too stupid ….
You were putting forward the notion that Iran was more likely to nuke Israel than the USSR or Mao’s China had been to ever actually use nuclear weapons in battle, rather than as chess pieces. Wouldn’t the proximity of the Palestinian enclaves in the almost ridiculously small territorial environs inhabited by both Israelis and Palestinian Arabs make the use of nuclear weapons as anything other than a bargaining chip to assert regional stature a totally absurdist scenario. Yeah, yeah…suicide bombers and all that, but the notion that Iran would launch a nuclear attack on Israel for the hell of it is, if you’ll pardon my French, deranged from any concievable political or historical context one can imagine. And whatever one might think about their crank press releases and hysterical rhetoric, I don’t believe the folks who run Iran are completely crazy at the level of suicidal psychosis. But I’m supposed to politely treat your paranoia as a rational debating point….
Give me a break ! (Of course, if a Pat Robertson – who’s had substantial impact on GOP politics over the last several decades – can float musings that Sharon was struck down by God for dividing the Holy Land, I guess we’re supposed to be prepared for damn near anything coming from the environs of the right, nuevo-right, neo-cons, con-cons and Christo-cons.)
January 6th, 2006 at 7:08 am
Oh…PfromM…Roger Simon has a typically looney post up right now putting the clock as regards “Iran/al Qaeda/Islamic fascism” at about 1937-38 in an unfortunate “Hitler” analogy. The conflation of the three – which would put Iran, bin Laden and Saudi Arabia in the same basket – has all of the intellectual integrity of David “End Evil!” Frum’s crazy Axis of Evil meme. I’m sorry, some people are just stupider than shit. (I can’t keep from being reminded that image – whih Roger himself conjured recently – of our intrepid fiction writer wandering the streets of Beijing in his Mao when I read his current “political analysis”.)
January 6th, 2006 at 7:08 am
that would be “Mao cap”…
January 6th, 2006 at 7:20 am
I rarely agree with Hitchens anymore on anything important – not even when he writes his sophomoric stuff on religion – but (and at the risk of raising the ire of Ahmed and Triple A, both of whom do ire well and with good information) I think his current piece on Sharon over at Slate is very sensible and frames the reality well.
January 6th, 2006 at 7:21 am
Come to think of it, except for a couple of months after 9/11, I’ve never agreed with Hitchens on much…
January 6th, 2006 at 11:08 am
I’m rushing off for most of the rest of the day, but I’m hoping for a Sharon thread. This is such a huge, huge, deal.
January 6th, 2006 at 12:30 pm
the other interesting – and most hopeful – thing I’ve read in the wake of this is Arianna’s take on the new Kadima guy on her blog.
Generally, I’m a total pessimist – if not a cynic – when it comes to the question of Israel and the Palestinians. I’m sympathetic to both within a certain context, but also find the political extremes on both sides noxious and unhinged, and they seem to hold most of the leverage. The West Bank settlements have always struck me as a key ingredient for a long-term recipe for disaster. And when a bunch of hyper-fundamentalist screwballs like Hamas can, in fact, rationally be seen as a preferable alternative for Palestinian voters to the decadence of Arafat’s boys, you know you’ve crossed over into the Twilight Zone.
January 7th, 2006 at 4:47 pm
Reg… thanks for the tip on the Hitch article re: Sharon. It was excellent. Covered all the bases, I thought in a very intelligent way. A great starting point for a discussion.
Personally, I harbor such deep antipathy toward Sharon. In addition to all the things, Hitchens mentioned—about, you know…..um…war crimes—our friend “The Butcher” nearly single handedly triggered the 2nd Intifada.
Yet, I find myself surprisingly undone by his disappearance from the stage…even though I don’t trust him for a second. As Hitchens said, it’s not Nixon in China….it’s far more complex than that.
I haven’t gotten over to read Arianna’s take on Olmert, the new Kadima guy, Sharon’s deputy, but I will. Thanks for the heads up.
And no, I haven’t watched the Springsteen documentaries yet. I’m waiting to do it with my kid, and we’ve both been insanely busy. But I have the whole Springsteen package on the coffee table like an art book, so I can walk by and gaze at it affectionately. (No, I’m not a well person, but what of it???)
The remastered BTR alone album is really wonderful. They did a fine job. It makes a difference.
PS: Re: Sharon: This LA Times piece is somewhat worth reading.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-arabs7jan07,0,3634703.story?coll=la-home-headlines
January 7th, 2006 at 6:36 pm
Yeah, I can’t believe sharing some sense of apprehension and concern at the demise (at least as a political force) of a man I’ve so despised.
January 8th, 2006 at 4:07 pm
Well, they blew it. Not unlike Arnold and other habitual frontrunners in life.
May 23rd, 2006 at 6:00 pm
free credit scores…
leaking fittingly fourteen factually hatred!free credit http://www.credit-report-support.com/ …
July 22nd, 2006 at 2:29 am
Ein Schloss, Ein poker Wurst, Ein Kopf !wxx
August 1st, 2006 at 11:21 am
Betting Bettingbaseball handicapping baseball handicappingbaseball picks baseball picks
December 10th, 2007 at 5:33 am
Hello people7020927db6ff06ca16a8d1f0ff16d906