What “haunts Kerry” (according to the AOL newsfeed) is his youthful days as a staunch protestor against war after serving his country in Vietnam.
As opposed to what haunts Bush, is his youthful days as a drinking, partying drug user who disappeared for months on end while serving his country in Texas.
And Bush’s numbers still appear strong while Kerry’s seem soft.
Ohhh, that wacky liberal media…
PAD
• 
I only pop in to say that I’d gladly join the debate, but Tim Lynch is doing a good job at making the arguments that I’d make, so I’ll let him keep at it. 🙂
Oh, no, Michael. Please, don’t let me stop you … I could use the backup, or at least a break! 🙂
TWL
Jonathan,
i wouldn’t dream of using the UN as a shield. Everyone who posts here should realize how worthless I feel that institution is.
As far as I can tell regarding Saudi Arabia, while you bring up irrefutable points, I simply feel we felt Iraq was the important first step. Since, as you said, Saddam was viewed by many in the Arab world as being an apostate and a heretic, then there would be less of an outcry in the Muslim world over getting rid of him as opposed to the Saudis. I do feel we will eventually dea with the Saudis diplomatically or by other means.
But the fact remans that Saddam was a threat. We can argue about degree. I happen to think he was a serious one. Further, if the democratization of Iraq is successful, it will be a shining beacon to the rest of the Muslim world. their example could eventually lead other countries to change their ways.
Is that a guarantee? No. But it’s always liberals who are excorciating liberals for seeing everything in black-and-white terms. Well, here’s where we have “the vision thing” in spades.
Bladestar wrote: “Hussein was contained and no threat to the United States. And don’t forget who helped build and train Afghanistan and the Taliban back when Russia wanted to take it… America created the mess in Afghanistan…
Jerome:
>Fred,
Umm…Bush is a wartime president because 19 Muslim extremists flew planes into the Twin Towers – killing aproximately 3,000 people – and the Pentagon and tried to hit the Capitol/ White House.
Or wasn’t that a big deal?
Typical. America is attacked, but we’re not supposed to respond because if we do, they’ll respond.
Strong logic there.
Um… Jerome. You are almost comical. Justifying going to war with Iraq because a small group of Muslim extremists bombed us is like justifying going to war with Ireland because Tim McVeigh bombed the Oklahoma Federal Building. Strong logic there.
If you insist on trying to provoke people, at least put some thought and creativity into the way you do it, rather than utilizing the same paper tigar arguments over and over, and out of context.
Jerome Maida:
“Typical. America is attacked, but we’re not supposed to respond because if we do, they’ll respond.”
Ironically enough, that was the reason Condoleezza Rice gave for explaining why George W. Bush didn’t take any action once we knew al Qaeda attacked the USS Cole — because they were afraid that a retaliatory response would “embolden” the terrorists and make them attack us again.
Didn’t hear any complaints from you then.
Me:
Declaring a “war on terror” is equivalent to declaring a war on pride, or a war on lust. It’s eternal and unwinnable. Terror, and terrorism, is not something that’s ever going to completely go away unless human nature fundamentally changes (in ways I doubt anyone would completely agree with).
AJ:
How about ending the war on poverty too? Its unwinable and human nature is involved there too.
Huge difference. The “war on poverty” is a metaphor, and everyone understands that. The “war on terror” actually involves guns and bodies and šhìŧ blowin’ up real good.
The “war on poverty” also didn’t restrict civil liberties.
Can you point to definite harm that the “war on poverty” did to individual citizens or the US’s ability to form alliances?
The war on terror is not going to end. Ever.
Then you’re arguing for a permanent restriction of civil liberties. A permanent policy by the US that we’ll go in and blow up whatever we want if we can claim a threat real or imagined. A permanent ability to imprison anyone we like for as long as we like, answerable to no one.
Is that your case? Is America as we’ve previously been given to understand it for 225 years out the window because of one attack?
If so, then it’s certainly a consistent position, but IMO it’s a very sad reflection on the state of the world. Bloodshed, death, and permanent war is not a way of life I plan on adopting, and a country which commits itself to that is not one I plan on having any part of.
Its not going to end if John Kerry is elected either.
What won’t? The War on Terra?
Of course it won’t — and I suspect the phrase is stuck with us for a very long time.
But there are right ways and wrong ways to combat terrorism. Setting ourselves up as the biggest badass on the block isn’t the right one.
I never said that the war will end if the country is considered perfectly safe. I say this is a new way of life. That terrorist have taken to another level and the world must respond. Or do you forget 9-11?
I have family and friends who worked in Lower Manhattan in 2001 — all of whom, thankfully, got out that day.
My father saw the towers fall live and in person from his apartment across the Hudson.
My brother’s fiancee walked several miles in bare feet that day to get out of Manhattan.
I do not forget 9/11. I will never forget it. Neither, however, will I debase it by using it as a political tool to turn this country into something it should never be — and frankly, I think using “do you forget 9/11?” as a bludgeon in political conversations is a disgusting and shameful tactic.
You say Bush scares you. Does giving 20 billion to help combat AIDS in Africa scare you?
First — the SOTU pledge was 15 billion, not 20.
Second — how much of that money has actually been committed at this point? And how much of that spending is being offset by our taking away money from family-planning programs and birth-control distribution? Look at what both hands are doing, not just one.
Words are easy. Deeds are more difficult.
The rest of your post is basically a rant. That’s your right, of course, but it’s not something that really needs a response.
TWL
Frankly, I think giving Clinton a pass on his service because “he didn’t say he was a war president” is beyond inane and weak. What if 9/11 had happened under his watch. What then? Would he have gotten a pass if he didn’t know what the hëll to do because, well, that’s not what we elected him for?
Uh … no. But thanks for the straw man — I had a scarecrow that needed some spare stuffing.
His response TO an attack would obviously be extremely relevant. So is Bush’s.
That’s not the point. Bush isn’t a reluctant war president. He’s eager. The only time he doesn’t stumble over his words is when he talks about violence and retribution. He uses the word “war” in his speeches with relish and with prominence.
Bush is clearly happy and eager to be a war president.
As such — if he has this messianic fervor that makes him so eager to send other people’s children to fight and die for his ends — then his war record, or lack thereof, is absolutely relevant.
If Clinton behaved in the same way, so would his be.
Thus endeth the lesson.
TWL
“Ironically enough, that was the reason Condoleezza Rice gave for explaining why George W. Bush didn’t take any action once we knew al Qaeda attacked the USS Cole — because they were afraid that a retaliatory response would “embolden” the terrorists and make them attack us again.”
If true that’s a definite mark against her. Is there a source for this?
Only….wasn’t the Cole attacked during the Clinto presidence? Hëll, why not blame Bush for not going after the Black Hawk Down warlords while we’re at it.
“I think using “do you forget 9/11?” as a bludgeon in political conversations is a disgusting and shameful tactic.”
Of course one man’s “blugeon” is another man’s “valid point”. Like Kerry claiming he hasn’t run any “negative” ads against Bush. Sure, when the good guys do it it isn’t negative–it’s “truthtelling”. Not much grounds productive discussion here.
“As such — if he has this messianic fervor that makes him so eager to send other people’s children to fight and die for his ends — then his war record, or lack thereof, is absolutely relevant.”
If. One would have to prove this to make the statement worth saying–an impossibility. Thus, any further discussion on this will degenerate into “Yes he is!” “No he’s not!” and the “winner” will be the one who has the wittiest retort–which has at least a coin flip’s chance of also being the truth.
To a degree that’s always the case with political discourse but this presidential election seems particularly rife with crazy psychobabble and extremist dialogue. I thought most of the Clinton haters were nuts but evidently the folks on the left learned nothing form their sorry example. If Bush wins at least some of the credit will have to go to the left wingnuts scaring the independents and moderates. Anger is bracng but it tends to be unnatractive.
From what I understand, the numbers guys like Karl Rove are most nervous about are the ones for overall approval rating.
Christ, just vote for John Kerry, no matter what state you’re in. Get this mongoloid mama’s boy out of our White House, so we can simmer tensions with other countries and keep from getting attacked again. I’d rather not raise children in the kind of America Bush has helped create.
Without liberals, there would be no women’s suffrage, no civil rights movement, no anti-war movement, no environmental protections, no regulation of big business, no protection of small businesses, no great science fiction novels, and no funny stand-up comics.
Without conservatives, there would have been no slavery, no “white only” restrooms, no religious supremacists, no book burnings, no McCarthyism, and on and on.
Conservatives know this, but won’t admit it.
Of course, if you really want a reason to vote for a Democrat, take a look at your paycheck now, versus your paycheck ten years ago. If there’s no difference, you’re an exception. (If you’re actually making MORE money, good for you. It still doesn’t negate the trouble this country’s in.)
Vote Kerry, vote Kerry, vote Kerry.
And please, not Nader. I made that mistake once already.
Fred,
You know, I have exchanged posts with many on this blog who disagree with me. Tim, Craig, Karen, Den, Jonathan and many others. You are the only one who takes an opportunity to bash me personally (and be condescending)on every post.
At least everyone else, however hot the exchange may get, will at least intelligently argue their positions. I have learned a lot debating them, and absolutely nothing from you, excepy how petty you are.
In closing, I simply refuse to respond to you at this point. If you were half as intellectual as you try to portray yourself on this blog, you would be a professor at some college or at least a teacher. Oh, wait…
And if you were half as funny as you believe yourself to be, you be a hit on the stand-up circuit. Oh, wait…
Without liberals, there would be no women’s suffrage, no civil rights movement, no anti-war movement, no environmental protections, no regulation of big business, no protection of small businesses, no great science fiction novels, and no funny stand-up comics.
Without conservatives, there would have been no slavery, no “white only” restrooms, no religious supremacists, no book burnings, no McCarthyism, and on and on.
Conservatives know this, but won’t admit it.
Neither liberalism or conservatism has anything to do with any of these issues. Particularly the slavery issue which occurred when neither conservatives or liberals even existed in this country. Before even the country existed. Talk about straw men.
Tim,
I am sorry you and people you know had 9/11 hit so close to home. Sometimes, with all the issues we discuss and get hot about, we forget this is very serious business. Life and death.
And to cast aside everything else for a minute, I simply do not understand why one of the things you find so unsettling about Bush is his apparent “relish” with which he is taking being a “War President”. He just looks determined to me, and putting on a strong front is for not only our country’s benefit, but the terrorists’ as well. Where you would see more strength in his not being so determined, they would see as weakness. There are reports that they see our hesitancy with invading Fallujah as weakness.
As McCain said yesterday, if we really didn’t concern ourselves with the loss of innocents, we would just fire artllery on the city and level the place.
That is the difference between us and the terrorists and I feel it’s a good one
I’m sorry, but what else would you have Bush do?
Go on Dr. Phil and appear torn? I am being facetious with that statement, but not by much.
Frankly, I am scared to death the next attck will make 9/11 look like something minor. Check and see about the plot to kill 80,000 people in Jordan. What i heaven’s name do you think the reaction would be if something of that magnitude was successfully carried out here.
Do I have questions about Bush’s policies? Yes. Am I following him blindly? No. I just think ambiguity would not help and would actually hurt, since the culture of the terrorists allows them to see such indecision as weakness.
Do I hope that most of what has made this country great ca be kept intact and not compromised by the War on Terror? Absolutely. I’m glad you and others feel that way, because believe it or not, I do as well.
At the same time, there is something to be said about being proactive, about not waiting to get sucker-punched again to respond.
There IS a balance that has to be maintained. There are no simple answers. I simply feel Bush is doing the best he can, dealing with a serious threat and a complicated world.
Jerome: “Charity begins at home.”
Take care of America with American tax dollars. America has plenty of problems that need funding. Africa is NOT part of America, America is NOT the world’s baby-sitter.
And just because Bush is doing “the best he can” doesn’t mean it’s good enough. Giving a monkey a tool box and telling him to build a Space-Based Missle Defense System and he’ll do the best he can too….
“He just looks determined to me, and putting on a strong front is for not only our country’s benefit, but the terrorists’ as well. Where you would see more strength in his not being so determined, they would see as weakness. There are reports that they see our hesitancy with invading Fallujah as weakness.”
I don’t know that that’s necessarily the case. I think (like most people) they are only looking at Bush only in terms of how they want to look at him. If we slow down with Fallujah, it’s a sign of weakness and they need to press the attack. If we charge in with guns blazing, then we’re showing how we really just hate them all and they need to press the attack. We can’t really wage this war just on what we think they’re going to be thinking, because they’ll be thinking the same (USA Not A-Okay) no matter what we do.
Bladestar,
It is a big world. We cannot islte ourselves from it. And I fail to see how letting millions of poor people die of arguably the most horrible disease known to man when we can at least do something to prevent it and/or ease their pain can be considered anything but immoral.
We spend far more on our own people, which is as it should be.
But that doesn’t and shouldn’t exclude us from helping others.
Again, the vastness of the problem is something I don’t think any of us can appreciate unless we actually saw the suffering firsthand.
This is actually another way we can take the lead, and to be honest, it actually makes me feel better than killing our enemies, to tell you the truth.
Jerome:
>>Fred,
You know, I have exchanged posts with many on this blog who disagree with me. Tim, Craig, Karen, Den, Jonathan and many others. You are the only one who takes an opportunity to bash me personally (and be condescending)on every post.
I have not bashed you personally or even sought you out. I respond to others, you pick a point of mine and begin a rant that doesn’t even properly address my point, I reply, certainly in a way that attacks your poor retorts, you respond with a personal attack, dodging my response… as follows…
>>At least everyone else, however hot the exchange may get, will at least intelligently argue their positions. I have learned a lot debating them, and absolutely nothing from you, excepy how petty you are.
Obviously you have missed the handful of people who question your points and the way in which you deliver them, while deciding to focus on some twisted “hurt” from my disagreement with you. I made points. You refuse to see them or even respond. I’ve pointed this out before with no response until you snipe me from out of nowhere again. Who is the petty one?
>>In closing, I simply refuse to respond to you at this point.
That works for me. I was fine ignoring your posts until you directly responded to mine.
>>If you were half as intellectual as you try to portray yourself on this blog, you would be a professor at some college or at least a teacher. Oh, wait…
I don’t attempt to portray myself as anything other than who I am. Your interpretation is not in my control. Grow up. Maybe come to the university that I work at and either take a class I teach, go to a workshop that I facilitate or simply comee to my office in the Counseling Center to get at the real issues here.
>>And if you were half as funny as you believe yourself to be, you be a hit on the stand-up circuit. Oh, wait…
Self-amusement has nothing to do with stand-up. BTW, didn’t try stand-up, I was acting and improv in NYC. Better to have tried than to simply live in the folks’ house crying about what might have been, huh? I have refrained from going into your past or lack thereof and will refrain from doing so again. As I said on an earlier occassion, go find someone else to try and poke with your stick. It isn’t long enough or powerful enough to have an effect on my life.
Sorry Jerome, but you miss the point again.
Until ALL the problems here in the USA are solved, we shouldn’t be sending a dime over there.
Yeah, millions in Africa dying of AIDS is bad, but the USA didn’t give them AIDS. Where are their own governments and countrymen?
America CANNOT be expected to take care of every other nation’s/continent’s problems. AIDS in Africa in NOT the USA’s problem, we didn’t cause it, and we have enough problems here. Cancer is a lot worse than AIDS quite frankly.
Until ALL the problems here in the USA are solved, we shouldn’t be sending a dime over there.
Yuck.
I think this is incredibly short-sighted and naive.
For one thing, the money and the expertise is in the US. For another, Africa is not isolated; failure to handle the problem there only means continued, incoming infection sources for us.
AIDS >IS
Forrest wrote:
I haven’t heard a good isolationist rant in a long time. I could go longer.
The War on Terror is more than just rhetoric. It is a planned and coordinated assault on those who would destroy us. What we are seeing is not the creation of more terrorists, but the flushing out of terrorists where they can be targeted and taken out.
There seems to be an idea out there that terrorists can be negotiated with. They can’t be. We can ignore them until their strong enough to hurt us; we can talk to them until they laugh themselves silly; or we can remove them like the cancer they are.
I am open to a better solution, but I haven’t heard it yet.
We aren’t privy to the intel the administration is. Like roaches, for each terrorist you see, thousands more exist. I firmly believe we, as civilians, don’t have the scope or understanding of this threat.
Plain and simple, this is civilization vs savages. There’s a reason you don’t see neandertals running around anymore. The world moved on without them, but I doubt they went quietly.
He just looks determined to me, and putting on a strong front is for not only our country’s benefit, but the terrorists’ as well.
But the problem remains that we’re NOT going after the terrorists.
We’re in Iraq, which didn’t HAVE terrorists until we got there.
Why aren’t we in Syria, Iran, Saudia Arabia taking out their terrorists problems (and their gov’ts while we’re at it)?
Bush has this determination to do what he wants, not what is best. And what is best is to concentrate on getting bin Laden, since that’s what this whole dámņ “war on terror” was about in the first place.
We also had an obligation to help rebuild Afghanistan, something we haven’t done either before going off to blow other šhìŧ up.
I’m wondering how long into a potential 2nd administration it would be before Bush gives up on Iraq to find some other toy to play with.
It is a planned and coordinated assault on those who would destroy us.
*chuckle*
What we are seeing is not the creation of more terrorists,
*more chuckling*
“Without liberals, there would be no women’s suffrage, no civil rights movement, no anti-war movement, no environmental protections, no regulation of big business, no protection of small businesses, no great science fiction novels, and no funny stand-up comics.“
You mean flaming left-wing radicals like Robert Heinlein, “Doc” Smith, and Lester del Rey? Or such dour stick-in-the-mud types as P. J. O’Rourke, Bob Newhart, and Stan Freiberg?
Look, I don’t carry any candle for the right-wingers, and their horrid abuse of the word “conservative”, but neither do I care for the tarring of any group with an overly-wide brush. “Always” and “never” are seldom accurate words to use.
Bill,
If true that’s a definite mark against her. Is there a source for this?
I remember seeing something about it in her testimony before the 9/11 commission earlier this month. I don’t have time to dig up the specific quote right now, but I’m pretty sure there was something there.
Only….wasn’t the Cole attacked during the Clinto presidence? Hëll, why not blame Bush for not going after the Black Hawk Down warlords while we’re at it.
Not this time. The Cole incident was close enough to the election that accurate intelligence about responsibility didn’t come in until right around the inauguration. (The 25th is sticking in my head as a date Rice used, though I’m not positive.)
Even if I’m off by a week or two — it’s not like people would’ve been pushing Clinton to do something on January 17th. The outcry would’ve been huge on all sides.
“As such — if he has this messianic fervor that makes him so eager to send other people’s children to fight and die for his ends — then his war record, or lack thereof, is absolutely relevant.”
If. One would have to prove this to make the statement worth saying–an impossibility.
I agree that it’s impossible to prove, but not that it’s impossible to provide any sort of supporting evidence. I’ll provide that in my answer to Jerome’s post further down. (That may not come for a day or two, though — too many other things going on at the moment.)
this presidential election seems particularly rife with crazy psychobabble and extremist dialogue. I thought most of the Clinton haters were nuts but evidently the folks on the left learned nothing form their sorry example. If Bush wins at least some of the credit will have to go to the left wingnuts scaring the independents and moderates. Anger is bracng but it tends to be unnatractive.
I hear what you’re saying, Bill, and I appreciate the fact that you think I’m hurting my own cause at times by going over the top … but there is a passion about this particular election, on both sides, that I think is going to lead to such rhetoric over and over again.
I know that personally, I’ve never been as fervent about any particular election as I am about this one. Some of that probably has to do with the fact that I’m about to become a parent; some of that certainly has to do with my own personal priorities. My “pet issues”, if you will, are on right-to-privacy concerns, civil liberties, the environment, and international alliances. The Bush administration not only disagrees with me on all four of the above, but seems to be jumping up and down on those hot buttons with great abandon. As such — I have never in the past felt that the need to change leaders is as great as the need is now. If that passion can get out of control, I’m sorry — you seem a reasonable enough guy — but that’s where we are.
I will try to confine myself to rational discourse in the future.
TWL
Tim,
If you’d mentioned before your impending fatherhood I must have missed it. Congratulations! When’s the babe due? Boy, girl or still a mystery?
I appreciate your opinions even if I disagree with many of them. I just worry that if some of my liberal friends don’t calm the heck down and Bush should win the election, they might spontaneously combust and/or move to Canada.
Hey Tim, congrats! Hope that everything continues to go well for you, your wife and your upcoming addition. 😀
Tim,
Let me join Bill in saying congratulations and best of luck on your impending fatherhood!
Even though we disagree a lot, you seem to be intelligent and passionate.
As such, I think you would be a great dad!
Best of luck again.
I’ve mentioned it a few times (and frankly thought it was kinda obvious in the “turbulence” thread a few weeks back when I asked PAD about his opinion on cross-country air travel with a woman in her third trimester), but it’s nice to get noticed, however late. 🙂 Thanks to all.
Girl, due in late August. My gut tells me the kid’s going to be perverse and hold out until the first day of school, just to make the start of the year that much more interesting…
(And there was never any question that we’d find out the gender. As Lisa put it when I first asked her, “Are you kidding? That’s DATA!”)
TWL
You’re going to name the kid Data? Tim, I think all those TNG reviews warped you just a tad. 🙂
America CANNOT be expected to take care of every other nation’s/continent’s problems. AIDS in Africa in NOT the USA’s problem, we didn’t cause it, and we have enough problems here. Cancer is a lot worse than AIDS quite frankly.–Bladestar
We’re in Iraq, which didn’t HAVE terrorists until we got there.—Craig Riles
WOW. Good luck with the rest of your lives you two. You ever hear of the Peace Corps? It was founded by Democrat JFK. Its one of his legacies. It was founded to help people around the world “who are not America’s problem.” I’m sorry that 20 billion isn’t enough. Maybe France, Russia and Germany should kick in a few billion. Oh I’m sorry they’re too busy stealing Oil For Food Money from dying Iraqis. And AMERICA is the laughing stock of the world? You’ve got to be kidding PAD.
THE END
AJ
Dont forget to vote. I’ll support whoever wins. As I said before, it ain’t being President. Republican or Democrat.
Tom,
Don’t blame me — Lisa’s the one who said it.
(Though her lab has been full of suggested names — “Data Point” being one of the less nutty choices. We’re having them all killed next Tuesday…)
Oh, and AJ? Your $20-billion figure is still incorrect. I don’t know if you read my response (as you seem to have no intention of replying to it), but you might want to.
TWL
WOW. Good luck with the rest of your lives you two.
Good luck on your spelling skills. I atleast make an effort to not misspell the names of others when I quote them.
As for what I said, I’ll just repeat it: the terrorists weren’t there till we got rid of Saddam.
Otherwise, I’m not sure what the purpose of your little rant was.
Tim, what are you going to do when the little one (my name suggestion: Mothra)turns into a rebellious teenager and hangs up posters of Ronald Reagan, spends endless hours playing George Will Books On Tape CDs, and begins to sullenly quote Ayn Rand at the dinner table?
Maybe you and I can arrange a periodic trade, since doubtlessly MY kids will be wearing Che Guerera T-shirts, playing Barbara Streisand show tunes and getting arrested for squirting superglue into the locks of the nearest Starbucks.
We’ve already thought about that: we’ll ship her off to my uncle, the big Republican of the family. 🙂
Someone in my AP Physics class earlier this year said, “so, are you two going to be okay if it turns out to be, like, a humanities person?” I said yes. The follow-up: “well … what if he’s stupid?” Gotta love teenagers who’ll speak their minds…
(Mothra. Hmm. Will consider it, but I’m worried that the cats would interpret that as a sign that she needs to be pursued crazily at all hours of the night…)
TWL
Nah Tim, you name her Angelica because no matter how much of an unholy terror she turns into, she’ll always be “Daddy’s Little Angel”
(Mothra. Hmm. Will consider it, but I’m worried that the cats would interpret that as a sign that she needs to be pursued crazily at all hours of the night…)
In my experience, cats interpret anything as a sign that something needs to be pursued crazily at all hours of the night – especially if catnip grows wild around your house… 🙂
Personally, I consider cats to be vermin, which is why I don’t allow them in my house. 🙂
Congratulations on the kid, Tim!
Tim,
Well, I don’t see you doing a Kevin Smith and naming her Harley Quinn, anyway:-)
You know, there’s not one Jennifer I know that isn’t beautiful, and Angelina would allow you to call her “Angel”.
Faith would be cool. As would Buffy, Dawn or Willow…Er, sorry, was temporarily taken over by the spirit of Joss Whedon:-)
Well, you have time!
Den wrote: “Personally, I consider cats to be vermin, which is why I don’t allow them in my house. :)”
I’ve got four cats, and when a mouse made the mistake one winter of squeezing under the door to get in my house one particularly cold night, that little critter didn’t last very long at all. Little pieces of fur were everywhere, and I’m sure that mouses’s last thoughts were, “If there’s a hëll for vermin, this is it!”
Well, given that both parents are atheists, I think the odds of “Angelina” are extraordinarily slim, with “Faith” not that much more likely. 🙂
Truth be told, we’re still working on the question of the LAST name. Lisa kept her name, so we’ve got a bit of a choice — and hyphenating is right out, as neither Lynch-Hazard nor Hazard-Lynch is something we’d want to inflict on a child…
TWL
Then the last name is obvious: Lyzard
Oh, go with what you’ll be calling her after the first poopy diaper; Bio Hazard. 🙂
[My first real sign of how smart my older niece was was when at age 5, just before her first sibling was to be born, she told her mother that “I will love my little sister and do anything to help with her. Except that I won’t change any poopy diapers.”]
We can’t do Bio Hazard — that’s already the sign on Lisa’s lab door. (She’s a biologist.)
And “Lyzard” was under serious consideration, actually — it’s again something I don’t think I can do to a kid, though. 🙂
TWL
And “Lyzard” was under serious consideration, actually — it’s again something I don’t think I can do to a kid, though. 🙂
Maybe not, but I bet when she hits that “rebellious teenager” phase she starts using it anyway…
Congratulations, Tim. May your child bring you joy and happiness all your life–especially when she’s driving you nuts.
Maybe not, but I bet when she hits that “rebellious teenager” phase she starts using it anyway…
Given that Lisa’s a biologist who specializes in herps, if she DOES use that as a way to rebel she’ll be falling right into our trap. Mwahahahahaha.
TWL
Congrats Tim.
Naming is fun, isn’t it? We wound up naming our son Orion, thinking it was kinda cool and all unique and stuff. Then everyone came out of the woodwork telling us they knew 12 Orions in kindergarten. The process to getting to Orion, however, was quite fun.
My closest friend suggested naming him Wynskyzer, being that my last name is Gray…Wyn…Skyz…Er…Gray…When…skies…are…gray?
Of course, we went through such witty names as Charcoal and Earl, too. My friend still refers to my son as Wynskyzer, but, since his last name is Pitter, I refer to his son as Patter.
Anywho, just to jump on the “name Tim’s child” train, how about combining the last name into Lynard…which of course would make the first name Skynard.
Then again, there’s always…
Monkeys
“Monkeys Hazard” – hmmm, has a ring to it… 🙂
You realize, of course, that we are now all on the list of people you must send birth announcements. I guess being athiestic you can’t use us as godparents, but we will all happily be blog aunties and uncles…
“Blogparents” — how’s that for a neologism?
And Orion seems out, it being a girl and all. We could go the mythological route, but that’s what we did with the cats and I’m not sure we want to establish quite that level of equality…
TWL
PAD,
I am so glad that you don’t include your political beliefs into the stories you write. Or do you include them and I’m too dense to see it?