MKA graduate, Alexa Aron, who still comes to Montclair every now and then to visit her parents, was riding her bike through the streets of Copenhagen when she got the idea for Lille Hus (Little House).
√¢‚Ǩ≈ìFor as long as I can remember,√¢‚Ǩ¬ù Alexa writes, √¢‚Ǩ≈ìI’ve had a deep passion for all things domestic√¢‚Ǩ‚Äùfurniture, food, design, homekeeping√¢‚Ǩ‚Äùand Denmark√¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s beautiful products made me feel more inspired than ever.√¢‚Ǩ¬ù
Alexa returned from her hip and trendy life in Denmark to her hip and trendy life in NYC to start her own business of bringing “hygge”– a Danish concept that has to do with things being both cozy and uncluttered– back to America.

headerRCI.jpg

*NOT a typo

40 replies on “Not All Kids Are Obese Graffitists*”

  1. let’s play “spot the typo”
    maybe not in the title, but there is one in the quote….
    How about laying off the bottle while typing, eh Deirdre?

  3. Even with the typo (which I of course spotted), it’s worth buying Danish stuff (for me it’s their cheeses) by way of annoying Muslim fundamentalists.

  4. cathar, glad to see you, too, doing your part for the War on Terror.
    We all have to make sacrifices. My cross to bear is all the cheetos stains on my tighty-whities.

  5. I also, however, noted that this business is physically located in Brooklyn. Which, last time I checked a map (mine may be out of date, of course), was not exactly even outer Baristaville.

  6. Pontificant, if I cannot personally annoy jihadists (since my military service was long ago), I at least continue to pester those who urge laxity re airport caution over their merry antics, as in the recent thread over airport delays.
    I hope it all adds up, in other words. In any case, however, I’d gladly pit my knowledge of both Arabic and Islam and Islamic culture against yours.

  7. Cathar, my knowledge is more in American foreign policy.
    But I would be glad to hear what you think I should know about Islamic and Arabic culture that would convince me to see things your way.
    Just to baldly summarize my perspective, as a starting point: I have no doubt there are “jihadists”. I don’t buy the whole “Islamofascist” thing though. I do not believe Islamic terrorists pose an existential threat to the US. And I do not think we live in the most dangerous time in human history (though I just read a book on global warming — that shit will scare the hell out of you).
    looking forward to hearing what you have to say….

  9. Pontificant, merely read the Koran. All those chapters (save one, oddly, as a column on another site reminded me today) start out by telling us Allah is “the most merciful” and praising his compassion, then proceed to order the lopping off of limbs, the subjugation of women, the need to convert forcibly, the duty to wage jihad, etc. Truly, what else does a truthseeker need to know?
    If you do, however, almost anything by Sir Bernard Lewis, including his recent “Why Do They Hate Us,” will do just fine as an adjunct, along with J. Bowyer Bell’s “Terror On The Nile.”
    Those who dismiss the term “Islamofascist,” however, would do well to add to their reading lists material on the very real attractions of “National Socialism” to Muslim fundamentalists, an attraction whicn continues to this day. To understand the chain from the Grand Mufti through his “nephew” Yasir Arafat to today’s Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas and Hezbollah is to receive a true chilled dagger aimed at the heart’s lingering warmth towards the accomplishments of Islamic culture.
    And I’m not terribly concerned that these folks may post an “existential” threat (as Sartre and de Beauvoir do to common sense? did you mean that?) to us as I am that they post a genuinely physical one. Their words are often piffle, save that they have a distressing habit of making good on their promises of vengeance.

  11. Thanks for the link, ROC.
    Rather than disputing point by point, I will send you to a posting I found persuasive today regarding Iran:
    https://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/009588.php
    I have read “Sir” Bernard Lewis and find him to know as much about what is going on in the Middle East as Sir Elton and Sir Paul and Sir Mick and Sir Bob.
    Sorry. Couldn’t help myself.
    I don’t buy Islamofascism because I don’t really think it captures the real and varied threats that we face from radical Islam — in its many stripes — and oppressive Middle Eastern states. It lumps things together for convenience sake — to scare us, I believe, and to draw the always useful Munich analogy — but it obscures the reality.
    I would not like to see a nuclear Iran. But I am afraid there may not be much we can do about that. I must say I fear Al Qaeda-types getting their hands on a former-Soviet nuke more than one from Iran. The leadership of Iran would have a lot to lose if they passed on a nuke to terrorists.
    My guess is that the Bush Administration will attack Iran, either before the election or after. I am persuaded by Sy Hersh’s reporting about the link to the Israel/Hezbollah war. I would guess that the Bush Adminstration thinks they can hit a whole bunch of targets, and I think they will not try to invade.
    I may be wrong — and I am not conspiracy-minded — but I base this guess on closely observing the words and actions of our leaders for the past 5 and a half years.
    My main fear — as it was before the Iraq War — is that I do not trust the leaders of our country to tell the truth or even implement their own policies in a competent manner.
    So, no matter what the reality of the threat, we have people in charge who have proven — to me, at least — that they can not be trusted with our security, or anything else.
    As for Iraq: if we attack Iran, I believe that we will feel fortunate if out of Iraq alive — and that is even without Iranian troops. The people of Iraq will overrun our bases, making the end of the Vietnam war look like … fill in your own cliche…
    I am reading Thomas Ricks’s Fiasco right now, and it is just staggering how out of touch the leadership of this country was about Iraq. Page after page reveals a stunning fuck up, resulting from willful ignorance and hubris. And to hear Cheney and Rumsfeld saying this week the same things they have been saying all along, pulling out their McCarthyite (yes, I said it — but at least no Hitler reference yet!) smears on anyone opposing or critical of the war (at least 60% of Americans now). And then Casey (I think) saying he is confidant that we can begin to draw down American troops in 12-18 months.
    He may be right, but tell my why I should believe that?

  12. Sorry to bore those not interested in this topic, but one more little point — after watching Bill Kristol on Fox:
    When has Bill Kristol been right about anything?

  13. I’m never persuaded by Seymour Hersh’s reporting on any darm thing, pontificant. I am, however, impressed by his ability to convince others (who commonly start from a certain cardinal point on the political line, let us grant) that he has the “right” sources for his oft-proved wrong suppositions and suspicions.
    As for Sir Bernard, I similarly retain the opinion that he is far more qualified to speak on matters Islamic than Sir Mick or Sir Bob or Sir Elton. He is certainly more lucid in general than any of those fellow life peers.
    With regard to “islamofascism,” I continue to find the phrase useful. It nettles them and captures their political mindset. I disagree on any plans to attack Iran, but will gladly apologize in retrospect if it happens (though I am not as convinced as you seemingly are that even its most fanatical of conscripts pose a threat other than by sheer numbers).
    You don’t trust those currently in charge of our security. While I shudder at the possibilility that the Kerrys, Deans, Pelosis, Kennedys and Reids of this world, habitial liars all themselves, would ever be in charge of it. That is a big, BIG difference in our worldviews, current “fiasco” or no.
    (Regrettably, too, this is usually the point in any discussion when loonies like mikey jump in.)
    Lastly, I still feel that too many Americans, accustomed as they are to near-instant gratification in so much else in this culture, expect too much in many ways after so comparatively few years of US involvement in Iraq. In any case, this is not South Vietnam (which did a pretty good job finally of defending itself until we pulled the supply and air power rugs out from under them).

  14. Let’s say we pull out of the Middle East? If they are so awful, why don’t we just leave and let them fight it out. Let Osama have his caliphate. And then let the people of those areas rise up and overthrow that caliphate if they so choose.
    Of course, the survival of Israel would be a real issue, and I do believe we ought to ensure their survival — though not necessarily support all their policies. So I know my suggestion is not realistic. But I make it just to try to reframe the issue a bit.
    You and I are not going to agree about much. But this country has to find solutions to very real problems. And, again, I believe the Bush Administration has been wrong — for whatever reasons — about nearly everything.
    As for patience, maybe you are right. But I think the American people have been given enough reasons to distrust the words of our leaders, so how can we believe them now?
    And I look forward to the day when I can hate Dean, Pelosi, et al (I was, and might be again, a Wes Clark man). But right now they are the only hope to stop the Bush Administration. I don’t have great hopes for the Democratic Party, but to me the first priority is to stop the current Administration. I will take good old-fashioned habitual liars over authoritarian and nihilist liars any day.

  16. Who cares about Czechoslovakia and Poland, eh pontificant? They will surely leave us alone if we just leave them alone.
    “But this country has to find solutions to very real problems.”
    Appeasement a solution? It’s been tried. 60 million died as a result.
    But you do accurately represent the position of the Democratic Party, I’ll give you that.

  17. Here’s your pal Josh just today.
    “The Iranian military√¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s equipment is outdated and essentially incapable of mounting offensive operations. So Iran is trying to build nuclear weapons and missiles to deliver them. Under the circumstances, wouldn√¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t you? Don√¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t you think a little deterrence capability would serve the country well under those circumstances?”
    I suggest the slogan “Peace for out time”, pontificant.
    I love his sum-up:
    “Of course it would be better to find a way to persuade, cajole, whatever Iran out of going nuclear — the spread of nuclear weapons is, as such, bad for the USA. But there’s no need — absolutely no need — for this atmosphere of panic and paranoia.”
    Like, nukes? Whoa! Like, what – – ever, dude!

  18. I wish I “accurately represent[ed] the position of the Democratic Party.” Unfortunately, many of them are too timid or wedded to the idea of American exceptionalism.
    Appeasement of what? Who are we appeasing? To what are Czechoslovakia and Poland analogous? Is appeasement a useful word for explaining anything or just a “floating signifier” — as the postmodernists would say (ask Deirdre PhD if academic mumbo-jumbo is not your bag; I am sure she could dissertate.) That whole line of argument makes no sense to me.
    And you do not really know what I believe the US govt should do.
    And as bad as the Democrats might be, the radical Republicans have LOST two wars. That has been clear for two years. Now they want to go for a third.
    Read bin Laden again. What the Bush Administration has done is almost exactly what bin Laden wanted and predicted.
    (Btw, where the f*ck is bin Laden? Doesn’t it make you angry that he is still free? that he is still alive? It makes me very angry. — and please don’t bring up how Clinton failed to get bin Laden from Sudan. This, even if true, would not be an argument.
    (Does it make you angry that the US military drew up plans to take out Zarqawi — who was in the Kurdish controlled area and was, if I remember correctly, on Saddam’s most wanted list — three (3) times before the beginning of the war. And each time they were rejected because, in my opinion, the Bush Administration did not want to remove one of the causus belli? This bothers me a lot.)
    Further, everything the Bush Administration has done has strengthened the radicals in Iran and strengthened Iran in the region.
    The American people were victimized by a well coordinated and continuous propaganda campaign before the Iraq War. We are seeing another one underway right now. The only questions are whether the press will facilitate this campaign again and whether the American people will fall for it again.
    Here is an article on the vogue for “fascism”:
    https://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/30/gop.fascism.ap/index.html
    One excerpt:
    “Charles Black, a longtime GOP consultant with close ties to both the first Bush administration and the current White House, said branding Islamic extremists as fascists is apt.
    “It helps dramatize what we’re up against. They are not just some ragtag terrorists. They are people with a plan to take over the world and eliminate everybody except them,” Black said.”
    A plan to take over the world? Preposterous. A plan to take over our oil? Maybe. The fact that guys like that are taken seriously is what is wrong with the whole discussion.
    btw, I would be happy to provide references for any of my assertions above.

  19. I do think things in the Middle East might well simmer down (either that or blow up totally) once a democratically constituted government in Iraq hangs Saddam Hussein for crimes against his own people.
    You suggested, half-seriously, pontificant, that we simply pull out of the Mideast and let Osama have his restoration (it’s not a new “thing”) of the Caliphate. But the Caliphate really is intended as an instrument of world domination, perhaps you forget that. Especially now that the rival sultanate of the Ottoman Empire no longer exists.
    And perhaps you’re just not as concerned as others, including self, are about the issues of ‘Eurabia’ or ‘Londonistan.’ I would like to hear the views of the habitual liars leading the Democratic Party on this one, were they to dare attempt framing a response.
    I try and read what I can pick up in Paterson that constitutes the Arab press. So I can at least attest that the true dreams of Islamic fundamentalists easily surpass the “propaganda campaign” you claim the Bush administration instituted. So much so, and so cockily, that it’s almost not to sleep at night for their chilling confidence.
    To them, dreams of taking over the world are not at all preposterous. Reminds me of a starving artist in pre-WWI Vienna, staying in doss houses and with but one admiring friend……

  20. If ROC’s National Review article is as scary as it seems, can you blame Saddam for gassing his enemies? ROC would have the balls to do that. Oh, but then Haliburton wouldn’t have anything to rebuild and no war profits. Better we bomb Iran. Of course, if we eliminated the world’s dependence on ego-centric religions and instead took on self-responsibility and treated others as we would have them treat us, we wouldn’t have to bomb anybody. Oh, hell, ROC’s right let’s drop the big one now and get rid of all those pesky Iranians that want nuclear power just so they can feel equal to the US and their nearby neighbors India, Israel, Pakistan, and Russia. Why can’t the Iranians understand that life is unfair? They have the oil and the US has the chaos of Iraq that came with eliminating Iran’s counterbalancing enemy.

  21. Angels’ post reminds me of another way our culture differs from Iran’s – here you can get drunk with ease.

  22. Cathar, if anyone is “often piffle,” it would be you. Save that I should have referred to your offerings as maunder, or blether, or some other word that you researched online in order to sound smart (or do you prefer “adroit”?).

  23. Did they fix the typo in the quote? I’m a teacher and will be horrified if I’ve missed it, but I don’t see one right now. What was the typo? Was it really so bad that the first comment had to refer to a typo?

  24. They fixed it. There was a ” instead of a ‘ and the word “do” was missing in the last line

  25. Calibrate, I won’t apologize for being smarter than you, since I generally don’t have to look up the meaning of a word like “maunder.”
    I also think you misused “adroit.” Clumsily, too.

  26. And was that a serious defense of of Iran’s intent to acquire and wield nuclear power? God (not Allah, who is definitely more “ego-centric” than Jesus or Buddha) but I hope not.

  27. I “clumsily misused” the word adroit? My definition says that it means “cleverly skillful, resourceful, or ingenious,” which you try oh so hard to be. Since ROC signs his name with “TM,” maybe you should sign yours with “fake wannabe knucklehead.” (I would have preferred to use some other choice words, but this is a family site). All of us can see through your ruse, you impress no one. I’m merely using your tricks to show you how obvious you are. Every post of yours is a “hey, look at me!!!”

  28. Calibrate, you sad child, I have no “tricks” here. Merely a better, quicker, even more adroit mind than your own. You have now tried and failed (at quite the late hour) to get people to “look” at you. Or maybe you simply hoped I wouldn’t respond.
    In any case, I dispose of wimps like you on a daily basis. Sometimes hourly. Usually at busier hours than this one, during which you dared post your harmless whinging.

  29. How disappointing this thread is!!! A nice two paragraph piece about a young woman with Montclair roots starting her own company gets this kind of nasty response??? Grammarians, Cheeto-eaters, and Scandinavian porn mongers: get a life!

  34. Good to see how you have all twisted this discussion from the original story … a local girl who is doing something interesting with her life. Good work — assholes!

  35. ah, it is so nice to call someone an asshole from hiding, eh?
    I didn’t mean to hijack this thread; the conversation seemed to just take off here picking up on several recent threads.
    and it is a cool biz Alexa has going. if I were the type to spend money on such things I would drop some of it at her joint.

  39. ok … i’m coming out. no longer am i “hiding” — now i’m going with my real name. i’m HIDINK. Now I’ve rally got guts, not cowering in the corner as “hiding,” but out in the open like a real man. Thank you all .. especially pontificant … for helping me to get the guts to stand up for myself and not hide behind the “hiding” moniker any longer. How’s that? Now can I call you an “asshole?”

  40. Unless there’s 2 Dirks in this town, there’s someone impersonating me! It’s been said before that a post with “Hiding” is the default setting for someone who didn’t enter a name. Therefore, there could be numerous people in hiding. On a side note, Cathar: how do you “dispose” of anyone on Baristanet? By typing more than the rest of us? Is there a prize for 30 posts a day?

Comments are closed.