Wonderful video of elephants getting milk.
Wonderful video of elephants getting milk.
Today I got this in an email. It seemed ironic after reading it.
Checking out at the store, the young cashier suggested to me, that I should bring
my own grocery bags because plastic bags weren’t good for the
I apologized and explained, “We didn’t have this
green thing back in my earlier days.”
The young clerk responded,
“That’s our problem today. Your generation did not care enough to save
our environment for future generations.”
She was right — our
generation didn’t have the green thing in its day.
Back then, we
returned milk bottles, soda bottles and beer bottles to the store. The
store sent them back to the plant to be washed and sterilized and
refilled, so it could use the same bottles over and over. So they really
But we didn’t have the green thing back in our day.
Grocery stores bagged our groceries in brown paper bags,
that we reused for numerous things, most memorable besides household
garbage bags, was the use of brown paper bags as book covers for our
schoolbooks. This was to ensure that public property, (the books
provided for our use by the school) was not defaced by our scribblings.
Then we were able to personalize our books on the brown paper
But too bad we didn’t do the green thing back then.
We walked up stairs, because we didn’t have an escalator in
every store and office building. We walked to the grocery store and
didn’t climb into a 300-horsepower machine every time we had to go two
But she was right. We didn’t have the green thing in our day.
Back then, we washed the baby’s diapers because we didn’t
have the throwaway kind. We dried clothes on a line, not in an
energy-gobbling machine burning up 220 volts — wind and solar power
really did dry our clothes back in our early days. Kids got hand-me-down
clothes from their brothers or sisters, not always brand-new
But that young lady is right; we didn’t have the greenthing back in our day.
Back then, we had one TV, or radio, in the
house — not a TV in every room. And the TV had a small screen the size
of a handkerchief (remember them?), not a screen the size of the state
of Montana . In the kitchen, we blended and stirred by hand because we
didn’t have electric machines to do everything for us. When we packaged
a fragile item to send in the mail, we used wadded up old newspapers to
cushion it, not Styrofoam or plastic bubble wrap. Back then, we didn’t
fire up an engine and burn gasoline just to cut the lawn. We used a push
mower that ran on human power. We exercised by working so we didn’t need
to go to a health club to run on treadmills that operate on
But she’s right; we didn’t have the green thing back then.
We drank from a fountain when we were thirsty instead of
driving to the store to buy a plastic bottle of water We
refilled writing pens with ink instead of buying a new pen, and we
replaced the razor blades in a razor instead of throwing away the whole
razor just because the blade got dull.
But we didn’t have the green thing back then.
Back then, people took the streetcar or a
bus and kids rode their bikes to school or walked instead of turning
their moms into a 24-hour taxi service. We had one electrical outlet in
a room, not an entire bank of sockets to power a dozen appliances. And
we didn’t need a computerized gadget to receive a signal beamed from
satellites 23,000 miles out in space in order to find the nearest burger
But isn’t it sad the current generation laments how
wasteful we old folks were just because we didn’t have the green thing
Please forward this on to another selfish old person
who needs a lesson in conservation from a smartass young
We don’t like being old in the first place, so it
doesn’t take much to tick us off.
I found it funny that an electronic note complains about all the electricity used today, like to create/send/receive the note complaining about it. It should have been written and posted through the mail. Like the old days.
It is the hobgoblin of the littlest mind to live-tweet your response to a television show. Especially if that mind belongs to a president orphaned from reality.
The Morning Joe duo revealed on Friday that the Trump White House tried to blackmail them into shutting up about the president’s unhinged performance. That blackmail included the threat of a story to be published by Trump’s journal of record, the National Enquirer. The story would be spiked if Joe and Mika called to apologize.
In the worlds of politics and television, this is a bizarre turn of events. As the chief executive of the most powerful nation on the planet, what could justify such threats and tactics? It’s tempting to say these are the methods of the mob, but frankly the mafia would not stoop to morning television.
Naturally, Trump himself disputes the Morning Joe account. But strangely not the fact that he had a conversation about the National Enquirer with a TV star.
“Watched low rated @Morning_Joe for the first time in long time,” he tweeted unconvincingly. “FAKE NEWS. He called me to stop a National Enquirer article. I said no! Bad show”.
Presidential historians, please take note: the 45th president of the United States felt the most insulting way to end his message to the nation was to criticize Morning Joe as a “bad show”.
Melania Trump condemned people who use social media to spread insults and lies. “Our culture has gotten too mean and too rough,” she said.
How right she is. Unfortunately, in five very long months, her husband has made the culture even more mean and rough.
“We need to teach our youth American values: kindness, honesty, respect, compassion, charity, understanding, cooperation,” she said.
She could start right at home. Maybe over dinner tonight, with her husband and their son. It’s what you might call a teachable moment.
Problem is President Trump’s ego is both boundless and brainless, held within an orange-colored prune of advancing senility.
Read the complete article in The Guardian newspaper.
The Economist magazine writes “Millions of Americans who watched or listened to Mr Sessions’s testimony, which was broadcast live on National Public Radio and all major cable-news channels, heard his version of the truth. But he did not provide much enlightenment for those who followed the saga of Russia’s alleged meddling in the election in 2016 closely. In response to numerous questions, the attorney-general said that he could not remember or was unable to reply. He insisted he would not discuss his conversations with Mr Trump even though the president had not invoked his executive privilege to prevent such testimony. “Consistent with longstanding Department of Justice practice, I cannot and will not violate my duty to protect confidential communications with the president,” he said.
Mr Sessions then specifically addressed an allegation that he had met with Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador, at an event at the Mayflower hotel in Washington in April 2016:
I did not have any private meetings nor do I recall any conversations with any Russian officials at the Mayflower Hotel. I did not attend any meetings at that event. Prior to the speech, I attended a reception with my staff that included at least two dozen people and President Trump. Though I do recall several conversations I had during that pre-speech reception, I do not have any recollection of meeting or talking to the Russian ambassador or any other Russian officials.
The attorney-general’s denial of a meeting with the Russian envoy matters because, during his confirmation hearing, Mr Sessions had testified under oath that he did not communicate with the Russians in 2016. It later emerged that he had had at least two encounters with Mr Kislyak. This created many negative headlines, which is why many assumed that Mr Sessions swiftly recused himself from the probe into Russia’s interference in the election. But in his testimony Mr Sessions claimed that he stepped aside not because of any wrongdoing on his part, but because a regulation of the Department of Justice mandated it. The regulation, 28 CFR 45.2, notes that an employee of the Department of Justice shall not participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution if he has a personal or political relationship with an elected official.
Mr Sessions’s refusal to talk about his discussions with Mr Trump meant that he was unable to answer some of the hearing’s most salient questions. He would not say whether he ever talked with the president about the FBI’s probe of Russian interference into the election. And he told Marco Rubio, the Republican senator from Florida who ran for president last year, that he could not comment on Mr Comey’s account that Mr Trump asked everyone to leave the Oval Office after a meeting on February 14th so he could lean on the former FBI director who was then in charge of the Russia probe.
Read the complete article on The Economist web site.
How might President Trump react to a world leader who, afraid for his image, perhaps afraid for himself, refused to fulfil a promise to visit a loyal ally. He might fire off a tweet: “RAN from critics. A gift for crooked MSM. TOTAL pathetic loser!”
But he won’t, because the loser is him. He got to hold hands with Theresa May when she visited Washington, but alas, that may be the high point of his cuddle-fest with her, and with the UK – because Trump, it now appears, is not keen on making his proposed state visit to Britain any time soon.
Donald Trump has told Theresa May in a phone call he does not want to go ahead with a state visit to Britain until the British public supports him coming.
The US president said he did not want to come if there were large-scale protests and his remarks in effect put the visit on hold for some time.
The call was made in recent weeks, according to a Downing Street adviser who was in the room. The statement surprised May, according to those present.
The conversation in part explains why there has been little public discussion about a visit.
May invited Trump to Britain seven days after his inauguration when she became the first foreign leader to visit him in the White House. She told a joint press conference she had extended an invitation from the Queen to Trump and his wife Melania to make a state visit later in the year and was “delighted that the president has accepted that invitation”.
Many senior diplomats, including Lord Ricketts, the former national security adviser, said the invitation was premature, but impossible to rescind once made.
Trump has named Woody Johnson, a Republican donor and owner of the New York Jets, as the new ambassador to the UK but has yet to nominate him formally. A large number of US ambassadorial positions remain unfilled worldwide largely due to the Trump team failing to make any formal nominations.
The acting US ambassador to the UK, Lewis Lukens, a career diplomat, clashed with Trump last week by praising Sadiq Khan, the London mayor, for his strong leadership over the London Bridge and Borough Market terror attack.
A Downing Street spokeswoman said it would not comment. “We aren’t going to comment on speculation about the contents of private phone conversations. The Queen extended an invitation to President Trump to visit the UK and there is no change to those plans.”
The White House said in statement: “The President has tremendous respect for Prime Minister May. That subject never came up on the call.”
Jenna Johnson, a Washington Post reporter tweeted to say that the White House press secretary had told her the Guardian’s report was “false” but added that the White House “won’t say when Trump plans to go to the UK”.
Later, The New York Times, citing two unnamed administration officials, reported that Trump was considering scrapping or postponing the trip. The officials stressed that he might yet “warm to the idea” but that keeping it off the schedule was the best approach.
And what do we learn from this? Once again we see what it is to deal with someone who has such high office and such thin skin. Just the notion of turbulence that might be seen around the world seems to be enough to scare him off. If he can’t bomb it or tweet against it, the cupboard of responses seems bare.
But, for the more important message, look to ourselves. It is easy to question the efficacy of protest. Millions marched against the war in Iraq, but couldn’t stop it. Millions more marched against Brexit and cuts in the NHS. There is rarely such a direct link to be drawn between public action and response from those with power, but each public protest speaks to the strength and tenor of opinion. Every one sets out a position and raises the stakes. Here the stakes became too high for a brittle, image-conscious president in Washington. What do we want? Not Trump. When do we want him? Never.
Few Republicans were quicker to embrace President Trump’s campaign last year than Jeff Sessions, and his reward was one of the most prestigious jobs in America. But more than four months into his presidency, Mr. Trump has grown sour on Mr. Sessions, now his attorney general, blaming him for various troubles that have plagued the White House.
The discontent was on display on Monday in a series of stark early-morning postings on Twitter in which the president faulted his own Justice Department for its defense of his travel ban on visitors from certain predominantly Muslim countries. Mr. Trump accused Mr. Sessions’s department of devising a “politically correct” version of the ban — as if the president had nothing to do with it.
In private, the president’s exasperation has been even sharper. He has intermittently fumed for months over Mr. Sessions’s decision to recuse himself from the investigation into Russian meddling in last year’s election, according to people close to Mr. Trump who insisted on anonymity to describe internal conversations. In Mr. Trump’s view, they said, it was that recusal that eventually led to the appointment of a special counsel who took over the investigation.
Behind-the-scenes frustration would not be unprecedented in the Oval Office. Other presidents have become estranged from the Justice Department over time, notably President Bill Clinton, who bristled at Attorney General Janet Reno’s decisions to authorize investigations into him and his administration, among other things. But Mr. Trump’s tweets on Monday made his feelings evident for all to see and raised questions about how he is managing his own administration.
Read the complete article on The New York Times news site.
Russian intelligence agents hacked a US voting systems manufacturer in the weeks leading up to last year’s presidential election, according to the Intercept, citing what it said was a highly classified National Security Agency (NSA) report.
The revelation coincided with the arrest of Reality Leigh Winner, 25, a federal contractor from Augusta, Georgia, who was charged with removing classified material from a government facility and mailing it to a news outlet.
The hacking of senior Democrats’ email accounts during the campaign has been well chronicled, but vote-counting was thought to have been unaffected, despite concerted Russian efforts to penetrate it.
Russian military intelligence carried out a cyber-attack on at least one US voting software supplier and sent spear-phishing emails to more than a hundred local election officials days before the poll, the Intercept reported on Monday.
The website, which specialises in national security issues, said the NSA document had been provided to it anonymously and independently authenticated. “The report, dated May 5, 2017, is the most detailed US government account of Russian interference in the election that has yet come to light,” it continued.
On Monday afternoon, the justice department said Winner had been arrested by the FBI at her home on Saturday and appeared in federal court in Augusta on Monday. She is a contractor with Pluribus International Corporation, assigned to a US government agency facility in Georgia, it added. She has been employed at the facility since on or about 13 February and held a top-secret clearance during that time.
Winner’s mother, Billie Winner-Davis, told the Guardian that her daughter was a former linguist in the US air force who spoke Farsi, Pashto and Dari.
“I never thought this would be something she would do,” said Winner-Davis. “She’s expressed to me that she’s not a fan of Trump, but she’s not someone that goes and riots and pickets or stuff.”
The NSA report makes clear that, despite recent denials by the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, the NSA is convinced that the Russian General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) was responsible for interfering in the 2016 presidential election.
The document reportedly states: “Russian General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate actors … executed cyber espionage operations against a named U.S. company in August 2016, evidently to obtain information on elections-related software and hardware solutions. … The actors likely used data obtained from that operation to … launch a voter registration-themed spear-phishing campaign targeting U.S. local government organizations.”
The intelligence assessment acknowledges that there is still a great deal of uncertainty over how successful the Russian operatives were and does not reach a conclusion about whether it affected the outcome of the election, in which Donald Trump’s victory over Hillary Clinton hinged on three closely contested states.
But the suggestion that Russian hackers may gained at least a foothold in electronic voting systems is likely to add even more pressure to special counsel and congressional investigations. The Obama administration maintained that it took preventive measures to successfully guard against breaches of the systems in all 50 states.
The former FBI director James Comey is set to testify before the Senate intelligence committee on Thursday regarding Russian meddling in the election.
Read the complete article on The Guardian newspaper web site.