As it turned out, the arriving party did get in at the original time. Picked them up, we drove back, and I stayed over up north. Enjoyed drinking my coffee and reading The Times Of Trenton on the back deck in the warm--very warm--sunshine. Later, I left them to work on the gardens and went to the Hamilton Marketplace; picked up a little sponge-holder for the kitchen, then stopped in on N. and the four boys.
Went to Staples, hung out a bit more, then said goodbye. I've been away from home for three days, and it's been great fun, but I was sleeping late and eating whatever and now I want to get back in my healthful routine.
Only down part of yesterday was that I lost my cell phone. Was talking to N. on it at Bed, Bath, & Beyond, but can't remember what happened since. Called it several times, but no answer. Darn.
Stayed up to see Wo Ai Ni, Mommy (I Love You, Mommy), the award-winning film about a Jewish family from Long Island that adopted two Chinese girls. My neighbors, Marty and Norma H., are the grandparents of the little girls, and I featured them in my "Blowin' In The Wind" article in The Breeze for June. Very absorbing, interesting program.
WIDER: You could have knocked me over with a Howitzer (look it up) when I read a particular piece today on the Comcast home page. It's a critique of Obama's speech last night (which I wouldn't have dreamed of watching) and is entitled "Fact Check: Is Iraq Combat Really Over For U.S?" Many of his statements are refuted (refutiated? Ha!) and the article includes:
"OBAMA: 'Within Afghanistan, I have ordered the deployment of additional troops who — under the command of Gen. David Petraeus — are fighting to break the Taliban's momentum. As with the surge in Iraq, these forces will be in place for a limited time to provide space for the Afghans to build their capacity and secure their own future.'
THE FACTS: Obama is reciting almost the exact language of the Bush administration's rationale for the Iraq surge (emphasis added): to buy time and space for the Iraqis to reach political accommodations and to strengthen their own security forces. That's quite a change from Obama's stand as a presidential candidate, when he criticized it...."
And that isn't from one of the progressive blogs I read; it's in the mainstream media. Uh-oh, I can almost hear the horror from certain quarters lamenting that anyone dare attack the emperor, especially using his own words. In truth, though, the article is very mild--to a fault, in fact--certainly compared to the manner in which my fellow blogging dissenters, firebrands all, state their beliefs. But here's the link to the article:
http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-politics/20100901/US.Obama.Fact.Check/
Of course, the real reporters and essayist tell it in much more emphatic, even inflammatory, language, as is proper, considering the topic is mass murder. Chris Floyd, about as impassioned as writers can get, has a very hard-hitting piece referring to O.'s speech. His should be read in its entirety--it's breath-taking in its righteous wrath:
http://www.chris-floyd.com/
Norman Solomon writes more sedately on "Common Dreams":
"...for good measure, Obama added that 'now, under the command of General Petraeus, we have the troops who are there in a position to start taking the fight to the terrorists.'" If, nine years after 9/11, we are supposed to believe that U.S. forces can now 'start' taking the fight to 'the terrorists,' this is truly war without end. And that's the idea."
Over and out.


___