It a nice site collecting all info about Socks.
I use to buy different variety of socks and i need this information.
Thanks for your time to post this article.

—-

Baby name meaning and origin for Samirah

Description for the baby name Samirah, the origins of the name and its meaning

—-

Hey, very interesting post.

My written English is not so good so I write in German:

“Lieber den Spatz in der Hand, als die Taube auf dem Dach.”

Yours sincerely
Köln

—-

Hi

I see that you are also into the elections.
We can win the elections!
Just have a look on www.rightpeopleforthepresident.com
This powerful viral tool that can make the difference by involving voters for a reason can be in your blog by a simple copy-and-paste, as you insert any photo or text.
Your blog has the power to make the difference. Don’t miss this opportunity for this last week before the elections. Insert our candidate’s player in your blog in 1 minute.

Paul

—-

Born in 1950, I never knew what the word homosexual meant until I learned at age 18. At first, I didn’t believe that men would do that, it all sounded like a really bad joke to me. I am thankful that I was raised in a Christian family, Mom and Dad and Sister and myself. I was taught that God made man and woman, Adam and Eve, that he condemned men who did the nasty thing to death and in Romans, chapter one, still condemns the practice. Like any man, women are a temptation to me, at least that is natural. To look at a man with lust is incomprehensible to me. It requires a perverted way of looking at things, I guess that is why it is called a perversion. This isn’t a popular way of looking at things, but I am definitely on God’s side about this one!

Um…holy shit. I think that last guy may have been serious.

Update: So the error message at the mothership changed. That may be a good sign.

Please go to the new Pandagon at http://pandagon.net/.

Here’s the new RSS feed.

Here’s a new post at the new site asking for feedback on the redesign.

For those who make the switch, the RSS feed and other important information will be there. I will post updates here in the meantime until everyone has made the switch over.

I’m with Mighty Ponygirl: This article by Rachel Shukert about how Rock Band saved her marriage was a nightmare. I enjoy writers willing to hang out all their personality flaws for the world to see, but it’s also amazing to me how some of them can describe themselves so well and not realize that these are the sort of soul-destroying personality flaws that will cause them massive problems. Shukert realizes, to a degree, that she’s a nagging, clingy mess, but she doesn’t seem to realize that this is something that is a major problem that can’t be fixed with a video game.

It’s too bad, because I was pretty eager to read the story, as I am both a fan of the video game in question and have a fantasy rock band with my boyfriend called Shitbird. We also have a band with a rotating cast of friends called Cleveland Steamers.* I can testify to the fact that there’s something very socially redeeming about the game. But Great Cat, even correcting for hyperbole, Shukert has it all screwed up and it wasn’t a breezy, fun read. She was making me mad.

I knew from the get-go that we weren’t reading a story by someone with healthy boundaries, when she started the story by recounting how she spent the summer after high school taking up space in her boyfriend’s band’s touring van in an effort to stop him from fucking groupies, and how she had to leave when the band got so fed up with her that they revoked her bathroom privileges. There’s many layers of lack of dignity there, though the bathroom detail—with the contempt for women’s basic rights on the level of the groupie selling in the movie Almost Famous going on—stuck out the most. Still, being a doormat to young men when you’re a young woman is par for the course in our world, and I can’t blame someone for it. What’s sad is that she’s still clingy and wishes to believe that’s endearing instead of flinch-inducing. Flash forward to adulthood.

Ten years later, I am slumped at my computer, reading an Internet recap of a 2-year-old episode of “Top Chef” that I have seen six times. I have not put on hard pants — that is, pants with a zipper or pockets — for four days. The man I married is on the couch in the living room, his eyes glassy as he diddles the control on the Xbox, blowing to smithereens shadowy figures lurching across the screen. We haven’t spoken in several hours.

“Ben?” I say. No answer. “Ben? Ben?” I repeat his name over and over again, with increasing desperation, finally culminating in a single, furious shriek. “BEEEEEENNN!”

We live in a two-room apartment. Next door, the neighbor bangs on the shared kitchen wall, the pounding muffled by drywall. “Quiet!”

Finally, Ben looks up. “Sorry, baby. It’s the noise-canceling headphones.”

Ah yes, the noise-canceling headphones. You could lock Rush Limbaugh, Phyllis Schlafly and Mullah Omar in a room together with a stack of Hustlers and 10 ounces of meth, and they couldn’t come up with anything more misogynist.

And that’s when I got really mad, in a “Oh no you don’t dare!” sort of way. Don’t rope me into the tribe of those who can’t handle our significant other’s hobby, as if all women had that problem. You and your man’s struggles over you wanting attention he’s giving to video games are your own. That broad brush insinuates that all men struggle with having to suffer women’s personalities in order to get laid, and that women have to nag and plead for men’s attentions and that we don’t have dignity enough to hang around hoping men throw us the half-chewed bone of attention. I’m sure there are misogynists out there who express their contempt for their wives’ very existence through passive aggressive use of video games, but if so, that’s a serious problem that is a) not even close to universally shared or b) not something women just have to suffer through without fighting back or preferably distancing themselves from with divorce. If your husband’s a misogynist who neglects you out of contempt, then it’s hard for me to find that a funny story where I’m grateful that the marriage was saved at the end.

Of course, as you can guess, what happens is her husband, in an attempt she characterizes as reluctant, brings home Rock Band so she can have what she wants (time with him) and he can have what he wants (time with the Xbox). Lo and behold, she finds out that she enjoys playing the game for its own sake, so there’s what’s supposed to be a quick man-bites-dog ending. Women enjoy playing and having hobbies! Who’da thunk it? All this time, we thought that women lived for men’s attention and men lived to minimize the attention they give to women while still getting sexual needs met.

I think there is an interesting story in there, even with the gender aspects, about how playing video games can be a self esteem booster for women sorely in need of one. Or hobbies in general. We’ve all seen women suffering in relationships where they are continually hanging around bored, waiting for their men to take some time to entertain them. I’ve written about football widowhood before. Without discounting the value of couples doing things together, I think it’s also important for women, for their own sakes, to realize that hanging around waiting for a man to entertain you while he’s capable of entertaining himself, is damaging. If you catch yourself doing it, get a hobby. One that involves him or doesn’t, but whatever you do, move on.

By the way, the suggestions for how to distract men from their hobbies are unbelievably sexist.

I click on another page, where a forum of concerned women instruct me to regain Ben’s attention by walking around the house dressed in skimpy outfits and waggling my hips provocatively. One enterprising poster, aptly named Cyberhottie69, even suggests draping one’s naked breasts somewhere impossible to miss — like the coffee table, or on his head, like a doughy, undulating hat.

The assumption: Men will never, ever, ever care about your personality or your needs or your desires, because they only keep you around for the sex. So get attention through sex. It’s soul-destroying if it works, but as the writer discovers, it probably won’t, which makes it worse, because you probably (wrongly) assume that distracting men with sex has ever worked for anyone. As far as I know, that’s an urban legend with no validity. My hope is that Shukert was only kidding when she tried it.

*Yes, there’s a theme here. I find poop funny. So sue me. Haven taken my cat to Molly to the vet today for a follow-up appointment—and having had her shit herself like she did last time, demonstrating that it’s an act of defiance more than an accident—I’m considering starting a new band called Molly Protest Events to fit the theme.

Here’s what Vern actually put on the air to receive the honor; he does the NC GOP proud:

And a snippet the post I did back when that ad was first released (March 2006) is below the fold.

The Twilight Zone-theme and music are quite appropriate in this case. This is one of the most offensive — and amusing — pieces of political theatre I have ever seen, with a picture of a fetus, then invoking the Homo Alert^TM

with an image of men kissing. He moves on to “aliens,” showing spaceships, then cutting to a pic of Mexicans scaling fences. This ad packs every wingnut, unhinged Freeper cause into this one media piece.

What’s amusing is that the spot says a lot about this self-loathing black man — the fact that he’s a Republican is incidental, other than it’s the party as it exists today that kowtows to bigots like Robinson. When the announcer in the ad is bleating about not being able to “post the Ten Commandments in public or say God in public.”, it cuts the all-American white children in the picture above.

The spot immediately segues to a mug shot of Jesse Jackson and a retro shot of Al Sharpton to talk about black babies born out of wedlock and quotas. There’s no logical connection, only the juxtaposition for shock value. It’s sad.

Yes, Vern is appealing to the base of the party and its values. He even calls the ad “The Twilight Zone vs. Leave It To Beaver” — the last shot is of the Cleaver family backing out of their driveway, going out for a car ride. The Real America.

It’s Vern’s ode to the TV lily white surburban fantasy world. In the real world, he would have been sitting at the back of the bus and chased from the whites-only lunch counter. Nice.

I can’t recommend Rick Perlstein’s Nixonland: The Rise of a President and the Fracturing of America enough, and I’m honored to be asked to be a part of the TPMCafe Book Club discussion of it. Happily, mine is the first post up after Rick’s: Overcoming The Spite Vote.

Ezra’s post gently puts to rest the ancient Democratic hobbyhorse of lamenting the loss of that percentage of white working class voters that long ago quit voting their economic interests and started voting against uppity black people and women, and against the “liberal elite”. Interestingly, the “elite” label doesn’t quite cut it when it comes to liberals—the lower you go on the income ladder, the more liberal you tend to be statistically speaking:



So why do Republicans win when (because of Republican policies no less), the number of people falling below the cutoff line greatly outnumbers the people falling above it? In part, because the higher you get up the income ladder, the more likely you are to vote. Also, there’s racial issues (gender a bit less, because while women are more liberal than men, they also vote more regularly, so it probably evens out):

(Results from 2006 election poll results.) I’m not sure how we win back the “Reagan Democrats”—white people, men especially, who would rather vote to screw those less privileged than themselves than to lift themselves up. They don’t even have to be most working and middle class white men. You just need a percentage of them who’d rather scapegoat than seek solutions to give Republicans that edge to get to 50 + 1%.

Trying to win over people who vote their resentments hasn’t worked. Look, Reagan won when I was 3 years old. The people who voted for him and are still voting for Republicans aren’t coming back to the fold. Their resentments are calcified at this point, which is why Republicans are still winning by fighting the same battles they fought in the 60s and 70s—sex in the schools, women’s lib, black people out of control. We’ll stop seeing them voting this way when they start dying off. An entire generation has been born and come of age since he won. Time instead to look ahead, where things are getting sunnier if we can actually harness younger voters.

What the Republicans did to change the political landscape was to be opportunistic. How and why that opportunity came up is an interesting story, and one you’ll get more of if you read Nixonland, but if we want to learn something from Republicans, it’s not “Get that resentful percentage of white working class men”, but “See opportunities and grab them.” The opportunities at hand are a younger generation that isn’t nearly as badly saddled with racist, sexist, and homophobic resentments and that has the numbers. The other opportunity at hand is the browning of America—a handful of states have already become minority majority states, and more will come. Focus on getting disadvantaged people to the polls instead of longing for that group of white people that will vote bread off their own tables if they can get bread and water off the table of a black neighbor.

“I am so sorry about what happened yesterday with that lame attempt at humor…I just really fell over myself in making it appear that I wished Barack Obama harm or any other candidate for that matter. I sincerely regret it and apologize to anybody I’ve offended. It’s a very colorful political season, and many of us are making mistakes in saying things we wish we hadn’t said.”

Let’s take a look at what she said that got her into hot water. I don’t see any other candidates mentioned in her assassination joke:

“and now we have what … uh…some are reading as a suggestion that somebody knock off Osama …uh..um..Obama [after being prompted by the FNC anchor]….well both if we could [laughing]”

I’ve laid off commenting about the dustup regarding the announcement of the 55 blogs selected for the DemConvention State Blogger Corps over the last few days in the hope of receiving more information regarding the program and handling of the fallout. There were actually two points of contention about the selection process that have been covered unevenly in the blogosphere.

1) Lack of racial diversity in the state pools selected (given the overall composition of the Dem party), and the fact that there is a different level of access to the state delegation given to these blogs on the floor at the Dem National Convention versus the general blogger pool, which will be announced this week;

2) The charge that there were political factors that went into the decision-making process for state blogs that resulted in highly qualified state blogs not making the final cut. This was the suggestion that state parties were consulted and were able to give thumbs up or down to specific blogs that may have been hard on the state parties.

Item number two has already been heavily covered in the progressive blogosphere, while outside of black blogs, the first item has been largely and curiously ignored by the top-tier blogs. As is the norm on such things, my position seems to straddle that group of progressive blogs. On the one hand, I think the problem is due to 1) an inability of state blogs to include more minority contributors; 2) some may not have thought about a lack of minority perspective on state and local issues as important; 3) those state blogs have truly tried by haven’t seen interest from POC who are well-versed in state and local issues who are able to/want to contribute to a state blog.

On the other hand, some of the black/brown bloggers have seen the selection results and have tossed “Jim Crow” charges out there — meaning overt, purposeful exclusion. I don’t see purposeful exclusion, what I see is a DNCC that wanted blogs represented at the convention in an unprecedented way, but was unable to see or fully address the minority representation problem (and we’re not only talking about racial minorities) it was going to create with its selection system.

The bottom line is that the lack of minority participation at the state blogger level is real, and it is a problem for the Democratic Party as well as the blogosphere.

However, both reactions aren’t particularly helpful in terms of improving dialogue long term — the defense shields go up, and nothing positive usually comes of this. It’s been frustrating to see it all unfold.

I was contacted by Aaron Myers, the director of online communications for the 2008 Democratic National Convention Committee, and spoke with him a couple of days ago to ask him about the credentialing process, the details in level of access, and some logistics, in an effort to get some information on the record. My notes are below the fold.

My phone call with Aaron was cordial; my goal was not to assign blame or defend any faction on the matter. I wanted to get facts on the table so that any further writing on this topic is guided by the latest official information out there.

There was no discussion or plan to change the state blog pool selection as it stands, mind you — Aaron Myers conveyed that people of color will have very open access (though not not precisely equal) to delegates to report on the convention goings-on, and that the general pool will be more representative of the diversity of the party without a need for a quota of some sort in the state blog pool.

Here’s the current status as described to me on Friday. I’m just the messenger:

* Differences in credentials for state blogs and general pool bloggers. The major difference — and the one that has caused much consternation to date — is that the state blog credential allows one blogger to physically sit with the state delegation on the convention floor and liveblog. There will be hardwired Internet access as there will be no wi-fi in the convention hall (because of signal conflicts with all of the MSM hardware).

Aaron said that the floor access for the general pool bloggers (that includes the MSM), will given in 30-45 minute blocks of time via floor pass credential, which will be obtained at a specific table/area in the hall. There will be no limit on how many times a general pool blogger can receive this pass during the convention. The general pool bloggers will also have a designated area to obtain the pass separate from traditional media so they aren’t competing with them for floor access.

Aaron noted that many of the state bloggers will, in fact, likely spend a lot more time with the rest of the general pool in the media filing center, which will be set up in the practice basketball court in a room adjacent to the main floor. This is not unlike many events I’ve liveblogged from — you’re off in a separate room that has big screen TVs so you can see/hear the action, and have better workspace for blogging, access to refreshments, etc. The pols, delegates and other figures wander in to do spinning, though I’m sure a lot of that is more likely occur on the floor.

* Number of people attending under a credential. State blogs will be able to send as many people as they want to Denver, but only one person at a time can be on the floor with the delegation.

For general pool bloggers, it’s a dicier matter. The general decision has been one credential means only one blogger per blog can attend. However, there are exceptions.

Huge, multi-contributor blogs like Daily Kos, for example, will obviously receive a credential, but Aaron noted that a blog of that size will be allowed to have more than one person attend. I made a point of saying that I understand the logic of that decision, but what about a multi-author blog that has a diverse focus and audience (not to be self serving, but PHB is a good example of this) that doesn’t reach the traffic level of a DKos or Americablog? How does the DNCC then decide which general pool blogs are allowed to bring more than one blogger to the convention? Aaron didn’t have an answer to that one, but he agreed that it was a matter that has to be addressed. Basically, the DNCC has to make some calls here, and I’m sure in the end that they won’t make everyone happy when the pool is announced this week. The blogosphere is an ornery bunch who simply want to see the party do this historic convention and coverage right.

* Open access to delegates: Aaron wanted to convey that prior to 4PM at during the convention there is actually a great deal of access to delegations that require no credentials at all, such as offsite breakfast meetings, and other caucus sessions where bloggers and reporters traditionally confer with pols and delegates.

* Other access issues. One plan is to have a special blogger area just off the main podium, adjacent to the print photographer space, where people can obtain good video/photos, and interviews with speakers as they come off stage. One problem that immediately comes to mind is how will it be determined which bloggers are able to be in that space when the most newsworthy speakers are at the podium. Is there going to be a lottery, a sign up area/system? Aaron said the logistics were still in development, and there would be more details later on a process that will ensure fair access.

* Finding accommodations. This was one of many concerns raised by Afrospear bloggers, including Francis L. Holland. It was addressed by Aaron in the call; he said that the DNCC has set aside hotel rooms for the media and bloggers, and the same housing information will be released at the same time to all credentialed entities at a convention-locked price. Will there be enough rooms? Given the size and scope of this event, I’m sure there will be a scramble for rooms regardless.

***

So that’s what I’ve learned so far. The situation is far from ideal, but the initial error has occurred — a model for the state blogger corps selection process that didn’t take into account the lack of diversity in state blogs most likely to be selected, creating full floor access that is not representative of the diversity of the Democratic Party. That said, continually flogging the process now doesn’t seem productive.

But — does the explanation of the logistics and measures above ameliorate this problem? Partially, but the situation and the tensions it has raised are unlikely to go away with the announcement of the general pool this week. All I can say is that the communication channels must remain open and the process of making it work should remain fluid.

***

UPDATE: OK. You’ve read the above post. A good illustration of how the above was seen by a respected Afrospear blogger is here. Francis and I agree on the importance of the exclusion problem, but have very different interpretations of the information conveyed and views of the problem. He believes that an assertive approach to negotiation is the correct path to resolution, I have chosen a less confrontational one.

Mind you, I don’t see them as incompatible — obviously an assertive activist approach to political change has proven to be effective — as has a diplomatic approach. They effectively work in concert over the long term - because an essential part needed for progress is bridging the communication gap. It has placed me in quite difficult positions fairly often in the blogosphere, as I said to CelticDiva in the comments of this post over at PHB. Celtic Diva:

I don’t think this issue is “solvable” for this Convention…
…not in this short of a time, not with space limitations and not in a way that’s going to satisfy anyone.

The best the DNC can do is remove any restrictions that may exist with the General Blogger Pool. It sounds like that is what they are working on. It’s not perfect, but it’s a start and it’s also pretty much the extent of what the DNC can do. The rest must be done within the blogosphere.

The only way to fix this is to continue to pursue integrating state-focused blogs with POC voices, to continue de-mystifying blogs for others (I did a lot of that this past weekend at the AK Dem Convention) and encourage more folks of all walks of life to join the blogosphere, especially encouraging minority bloggers. Also, encouraging more folks to approach blogging from the “50-state strategy” is important for maximum impact in state elections.

We also need to pressure our Local, State and Federal representatives to find more and better ways to provide Internet access to EVERYONE, regardless of urban/rural location or economic status.

Through all of this, I’ve learned that having a discussion on race is extremely difficult and most Progressives (especially white Progressives) completely shy away from it. Some of them have a wicked case of denial of the problem. However, I believe…I know…that a whole lot of folks are afraid that they will be labeled as “racist” just by discussing their thoughts.

I can attest to that one. My POC boss, friends and family were pretty blown away when that label was thrown at me.

I’ve discovered that it’s easy to get riled and it is easy for misunderstandings to occur on all sides. It is also common to have one’s words twisted by folks with an agenda and then pushed for their own personal gain. No matter what is true, some folks will see what they want to see, even if they have to alter reality to do it. That applies to folks of all colors.

The DNC can no more effectively and efficiently integrate the 2008 Convention by itself than white America can fix the racial inequalities in the US by itself. Any of this requires constant dialogue, unwavering teamwork and give-and-take on all sides.

Name-calling halts that process in its tracks.

It makes one wonder what folks who can toss those names around so easily and inaccurately at fellow Progressives…fellow Obama suppporters…are really trying to accomplish?

It also makes one wonder who benefits?

no one benefits, in the end
I’ve taken the slings and arrows from both sides.

I get blasted by some white progressives for pointing out their lack of coverage of Jena 6, then I receive the most rank and horrible emails from some POC (selling out, wanting to hold a brother back) for holding Obama accountable for the McClurkin nonsense. It seems to come with the territory for me. I just wish there were more willing to step into the public line of fire with me to try to bridge these gaps.

I agree with what you’ve said - the PR damage has been done, and thank you for saying how difficult it is to discuss race for the reasons both of us outlined. Admitting this is how you start to break down barriers — by acknowledging the damage caused, inadvertently, by politically correct culture that makes it difficult to speak frankly with curiosity about our differences (particularly out of benign ignorance) without having the minority group jump down your throat.

On the other hand there is also a strain of willful ignorance in some about issues of concern to minorities results in “it’s their problem to solve” because progressive whites see nothing in it for them — loathing the thought of being perceived as racist even as they try to speak up. It leads to lack of acknowledgment of the very white privilege they enjoy in their silence, and the vicious circle of poor communication, misunderstanding and lack of inclusion or outreach continues.

Peanut butter: chunky, creamy or don’t eat it/allergic?
Bread: white or wheat?
Steak: rare, medium, well-done, or no meat?
Ice Cream: chocolate, vanilla or mixes (Cookies n Cream, Rocky Road, Butter Pecan, etc.)?

More below the fold.

Sleep habits
Morning or evening person?
Tummy, back or side sleeper?
Need an alarm or wake up on own?

Movies
Flashdance or Footloose?
Star Wars or Star Trek?
Subtitles or dubbing?
Comedy, drama or documentary?

Popular Music
Classic soul or hip hop?
Hair band or grunge?
CDs or MP3s?

Additional categories from readers…

Favorite Cereal?
Seafood?
Hot Drink?
Soda?
Crackers?
Books?

Feel free to add other categories…(I’ll give my answers in the comments.)