What’s with all the acorns?

The oak trees in our neighborhood have produced a bumper crop of acorns this year. The sound of acorns hitting the roof and the cars is perpetual. I swept up a huge pile in the driveway in back.

Lots of Acorns this year.

Lots of Acorns this year.

If you look around the web, you can find out a few things about this: It owes more to extra precipitation than anything. It does not tell anything about future weather–it is a “hind cast,” not a forecast. Deer hunters are very interested in the crop, but this abundance might mean the deer aren’t going to have to move around as much.

Location:Oaklawn Ave,Edina,United States

Rainbow over “This Town”

Mark Leibovich’s delightful new book, This Town, opens with an extended conceit–the memorial service for Tim Russert introduces his theme and many of the main ‘characters.’ The scene is full of false grief and shameless networking.

Russert died suddenly of heart failure just as the 2008 presidential campaign was getting into gear. Those of us on the right had special reason to lament his passing, since–after his passing–he seemed to be the only one missing on the scene who could have dared to pop the Obama-worship balloon that has only now–in 2013–seen any sign of deflating.

I highly recommend the book for it’s portrayal of Washington’s political and media culture. Regardless of your politics, you will be informed and entertained.

At the end of the Russert memorial episode, the assembled politerati have repaired to the roof of Kennedy Center for a cocktail party, when they witness a double rainbow. Atheists and believers compare interpretations of this celestial phenomenon. Leibovich’s final comment on the subject is, “God could not be reached for comment.”

I wish Leibovich had at least tried to reach God–he could have easily looked it up: Gen. 9:16. The rainbow is not a message to man, but a reminder–like a string He ties around His finger–from God to God, that He has promised never to destroy mankind again. As far as a message to man is concerned, we should remember, too–though mankind’s wickedness may again approach antediluvian proportions–as long as God sees His bow in the sky, we are safe.

Here’s the dog

Monty B&W

Taken with a Minolta Maxuum 7xi on expired TMax 100. Developed with HC-110 (B). Scanned with Epson v700. (Click on photo to see full size.)

All rights reserved.

Circle the Wagons

The New York Times has an editorial on Benghazi today that blames the CIA for everything. Apparently the State Department merely pointed out to the CIA that the original talking points on the attack made the CIA look bad, so the CIA made all the changes to the talking points themselves, trying to cover their own tracks.

Did Bill and Hill write this editorial? Has the Times forgotten that the President and the Secretary of State were all that week and the next (or more) blaming a YouTube video for our losses in Benghazi? That line of reasoning, which was also prominent in Susan Rice’s appearances, is not at all apparent in the small cache of emails the press has been permitted to see so far.

A large policy question has not been addressed much in all of this: Is the USA better off with a foreign policy that pretends things are going better in the war against Islamist extremism than is in fact the case? If they could see clearly that the White House and State Department want to hide the involvement of Islamist extremists in these attacks, would they think that was a wise policy? I think a case can be made that they would.

Perhaps the Obama administration is too timid in making some case that a policy of ignoring these miscreants is better than one that names them for what they are and seeks out direct actions to stop them. Not just drones, which are an execution without a trial and without gathering any valuable intelligence.

Remember the Clinton ‘vacation from history?’ The electorate may be in a mood for another. This could could be changing at this very moment. At some point, people begin to notice that fellow citizens are being slaughtered….

Camera Load Fail

I ran my first test roll through a new-to-me Mamiya 645 yesterday, and stand-developed it (also a first for me).

Unfortunately, I loaded the film backwards! Never seen such a clear sheet of film! That backing paper sure does its job!

The film was Neopan Acros 100. I had been developing a lot of Ilford, and I usually don’t do a presoak. Not knowing that Acros has such a thick anti-halation layer, I was not planning to presoak, but at the last minute decided to do it. I only gave it 30 seconds, but the water came out dirty blue, and I thought, “Uh-oh, that looks bad.” So I quick-rinsed it one more time and went on with the show. (HC-110 G, which is 1:119, for an hour, with only thirty seconds of agitation at the start.)

I am here to tell you that the clear film that emerged also still has a slight blue haze throughout.

Lessons: 1) Presoak your Acros 5 minutes. 2) A Mamiya 645 film holder has to have emulsion-side out when it goes into the camera (Duh!).

Compare and contrast

The One, the great uniter, has a new ad running in Ohio that ends with the following image:

The ad itself is virtually without content.  Obama took GM through bankruptcy with government help, Romney thought it should have been done without the government.  ”Not one of us.”  Nice, O.

Watching the ad, I noticed that one of the speakers looks like a guy, not from GM, but a paper plant worker.  He appears in another ad by a PAC.  Perhaps another sign of collusion between the Obama campaign and the Obama PACs.

Anyway, compare the contentless negativity of the Obama ad with the following:

What’s going on here?

The Mainstream Media seem to be realizing that Romney just might win, and they better get their heads around it…. Maybe they better start trying to butter him up so as to co-opt him later?

Anyway, exhibit one is from CBS News:

I may be wrong about the next one, but even the New York Times seems to be softening this morning:

Romney as Manager

Although, there is a curious difference in the home page subhead (“Safe and Socratic”), and the story page subhead (“Unhurried and Socratic”).  Actually, to a large extent, the Times in this story seems to be pre-formulating their criticisms of a possible Romney administration:  safe, slow, plodding, procrastinating, not-up-to-the-crisis-a-day-pace-of-the-modern-presidencey.

 

Clinton at Andrews appears to blame video for Libya attack

Secretary of State Hilary Clinton did not mention al Qaeda, terrorism or terror in general as a cause of the attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.  Immediately after mentioning the ‘heavy assault’ on the consulate, she ventured into the tried and untrue territory of the anti-Mohammad video:

This has been a difficult week for the State Department and for our country. We’ve seen the heavy assault on our post in Benghazi that took the lives of those brave men. We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful internet video that we had nothing to do with. It is hard for the American people to make sense of that because it is senseless, and it is totally unacceptable.

The people of Egypt, Libya, Yemen, and Tunisia did not trade the tyranny of a dictator for the tyranny of a mob. Reasonable people and responsible leaders in these countries need to do everything they can to restore security and hold accountable those behind these violent acts. And we will, under the President’s leadership, keep taking steps to protect our personnel around the world. http://translations.state.gov/st/english/texttrans/2012/09/20120914136067.html#ixzz29aEUeU7Q

This must be the part that mislead Reuthers into repeating the administration line that the Benghazi attacks were a peculiarly violent form of movie review.

 

 

Obama does not mention terror at Andrews ceremony

The president did not mention al Qaeda, terrorism or terror in general at the ceremony for the American fallen from the Libya attack.  See the following links:

Text of President’s remarks

Mp3 of President’s remarks

Mp4 of President’s remarks

 

Obama uses coffins as coverup backdrop

Here you can see that Reuthers reported the Obama administration line that the Libya attacks were due to a mob action, not terrorism:

I will try to get more of the actual text from Sec. Clinton and the president in later posts.