Wednesday, May 09, 2007
What's your problem?
I really enjoy watching the “What’s your problem?” NRO bits but have to agree with this reader about Peter Beinart’s sound levels.
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
Clarence Thomas on the Constitution
Courtesy of City Journal. I've been waiting to post this, having read it last week.
Re LJ and Houston
1) That you rented monthly from the owner. It was an apartment to you. And so what? How does apartment v condo change my point?
2) You're right. I'm not a foodie and you weren't either until you met C.
2) You're right. I'm not a foodie and you weren't either until you met C.
Re: Re LJ and Houston
1) It was a condo, not an apartment.
2) I went to the same restaurants you did.
Don't let being a native Houstonian cloud your judgement. I was as pro-Houston as anyone could be and it pains me to say the things about Houston that I have. I don't think I've ever met anyone that has lived in both that prefers Houston.
2) I went to the same restaurants you did.
Don't let being a native Houstonian cloud your judgement. I was as pro-Houston as anyone could be and it pains me to say the things about Houston that I have. I don't think I've ever met anyone that has lived in both that prefers Houston.
Re LJ and Houston
Two quick points. LJ, after you moved out of your parent's house, you chose to live in a crummy apartment in a crummy part of town. You now live in a nice suburb of Dallas. I think that colors your thinking.
Also, you didn't go to decent restaurants until you met C; ergo, you don't know any decent restaurants in Houston.
Also, you didn't go to decent restaurants until you met C; ergo, you don't know any decent restaurants in Houston.
Monday, May 07, 2007
Hewitt on Lileks...
HH goes above and beyond for his friend Lileks here:
So does a newspaper need local writers with national talent?
I have broadcast four of the past five years from the Minnesota State Fair. Each year Lileks has been kind enough to spend an afternoon with me, and the crowds that come to say hello to James and snatch a photo or an autograph are large and always the sort of people you want reading your paper --the employed, the dads and moms, the folks who patronize your advertisers. They know Lileks. They are connected to him --which isn't surprising since he's been writing for the paper since before Reagan entered office (and he's still on the sunny side of 50!).
So does a newspaper need local writers with national talent?
I have broadcast four of the past five years from the Minnesota State Fair. Each year Lileks has been kind enough to spend an afternoon with me, and the crowds that come to say hello to James and snatch a photo or an autograph are large and always the sort of people you want reading your paper --the employed, the dads and moms, the folks who patronize your advertisers. They know Lileks. They are connected to him --which isn't surprising since he's been writing for the paper since before Reagan entered office (and he's still on the sunny side of 50!).
Re: Houston v. Dallas
Ok, if we are going to discuss this, you're right, we ought to set some ground rules.
It's hard to take the suburbs out of the picture, at least for me. What are Coppell, Plano, Garland, The Woodlands, Sugar Land, Katy, the Park Cities, and Bellaire, if not part of their neighboring behemoths? Aren't Kingwood and Clear Lake now actually part of Houston? I thought they'd been annexed. But, I'll try to accept your premise.
I also have to defer to your more recently having lived in both cities. I grew up in Dallas but left there in 1978 and haven't lived in Houston since 1995. I thought that might make me more objective but it may just make me less informed. I certainly agree that towns like that one with the minor league baseball team shouldn't count for Dallas...In my youth I used to camp on the farms/ranches that used to be there.
Fort Worth is definitely its own city (if only by its own proclamation) and its ARTS certainly slam that of Dallas in every area save Music. Thank G-d for the Bass and Hunt families. And you're right about its downtown, too. Very user-friendly, even after hours.
Traffic/Mass Transit: I'll defer to you on the latter but my last few trips through the city, including after peak hours, were hell.
More to come.
It's hard to take the suburbs out of the picture, at least for me. What are Coppell, Plano, Garland, The Woodlands, Sugar Land, Katy, the Park Cities, and Bellaire, if not part of their neighboring behemoths? Aren't Kingwood and Clear Lake now actually part of Houston? I thought they'd been annexed. But, I'll try to accept your premise.
I also have to defer to your more recently having lived in both cities. I grew up in Dallas but left there in 1978 and haven't lived in Houston since 1995. I thought that might make me more objective but it may just make me less informed. I certainly agree that towns like that one with the minor league baseball team shouldn't count for Dallas...In my youth I used to camp on the farms/ranches that used to be there.
Fort Worth is definitely its own city (if only by its own proclamation) and its ARTS certainly slam that of Dallas in every area save Music. Thank G-d for the Bass and Hunt families. And you're right about its downtown, too. Very user-friendly, even after hours.
Traffic/Mass Transit: I'll defer to you on the latter but my last few trips through the city, including after peak hours, were hell.
More to come.
Lileks spiked?
The Strib should have just canned him instead of consigning him to hell. I know it might not have been the best thing for Mr. Lileks but why hang him out on a gig he'll hate.
Lileks will only get better, both artistically and materially.
Lileks will only get better, both artistically and materially.
Re: Dallas vs. Houston
I have to agree to disagree with some of your comparisons between the two cities. At the outset, let me say that I am talking about Dallas proper, not Dallas-Fort Worth, nor all the little mini-cities that make up what most people consider Dallas. On the Houston side, I'm not talking about the far-from-the-city-center suburbs ala Kingwood, The Woodlands, Sugarland, Clear Lake, etc.
On the arts comparison (as I now go against the guidelines I mentioned above), Fort Worth surpasses Dallas easily, which to me makes Houston far ahead of Dallas.
Restaurants - I thought Houston had tons of great ones until I moved here. It is truly unbelievable as to the number of great places. On the plus side for Dallas is the yearly "Restaurant Week" sponsored by KRLD to benefit the Dallas Food Bank. For a $30 fixed price, you get a 3 course meal at any of the many restaurants that are involved. And the week usually stretches to 3. And we are talking 4 and 5 star places (Mansion on Turtle Creek, Nana, Nobu to name a few). It is a great way to go to the places that would normally be out your price range and get the same quality food/service. C and I hit 3 or 4 every year. We have friends that almost go every night.
Traffic/Mass Transit - Dallas again is the winner. First of all, the traffic isn't that bad anyway. There are spots that get backed up and weather can play a part, but unlike 610 between I-10 and 59 that seems to be a total parking lot 24/7, during the day traffic moves quite easily here. Plus I can't think of one freeway in Dallas that is under construction. 45 and 610 and I-10 in Houston seemingly always are. And the DART light-rail/bus system is used much more than I had thought. Plus the train service between Dallas and Ft. Worth. When I worked at Ernst and Young (in downtown Dallas), I drove 5 miles to a train station, caught the train into downtown Dallas, then took the DART light-rail to a stop across the street from my building. From the time I left my house to the time I walked in the building was about 50 minutes. Free parking at the train station and EY picked up a BIG part of the DART/Train pass fee (cost me about $20 a month). Other than the Park-N-Ride system for folks who live WAY out, Houston has what, that stupid rail system between the Dome and Medical Center?
Yes, both cities are hotter than hell, but Dallas (usually) doesn't have the humidity and even when it's 100+, it doesn't feel that hot, especially in the shade.
The Chronicle is a rag, compared to almost any daily paper. It is just "too busy" and difficult to read.
Maybe after the political anti-Christ got through redrawing district lines Houston became more Republican, but I think in general, Dallas is a more conservative place than Houston. SJL...need I say more?
And Houston is just a sprawling, dirty, billboard infested place. Dallas has a much cleaner, newer look to it. If the Dallas mayor and council could just get off their asses and do something to downtown so that it doesn't become a wasteland weekdays after 6 and on weekends. All they need to do is look to their little brother Fort Worth. Their downtown is awesome.
On the arts comparison (as I now go against the guidelines I mentioned above), Fort Worth surpasses Dallas easily, which to me makes Houston far ahead of Dallas.
Restaurants - I thought Houston had tons of great ones until I moved here. It is truly unbelievable as to the number of great places. On the plus side for Dallas is the yearly "Restaurant Week" sponsored by KRLD to benefit the Dallas Food Bank. For a $30 fixed price, you get a 3 course meal at any of the many restaurants that are involved. And the week usually stretches to 3. And we are talking 4 and 5 star places (Mansion on Turtle Creek, Nana, Nobu to name a few). It is a great way to go to the places that would normally be out your price range and get the same quality food/service. C and I hit 3 or 4 every year. We have friends that almost go every night.
Traffic/Mass Transit - Dallas again is the winner. First of all, the traffic isn't that bad anyway. There are spots that get backed up and weather can play a part, but unlike 610 between I-10 and 59 that seems to be a total parking lot 24/7, during the day traffic moves quite easily here. Plus I can't think of one freeway in Dallas that is under construction. 45 and 610 and I-10 in Houston seemingly always are. And the DART light-rail/bus system is used much more than I had thought. Plus the train service between Dallas and Ft. Worth. When I worked at Ernst and Young (in downtown Dallas), I drove 5 miles to a train station, caught the train into downtown Dallas, then took the DART light-rail to a stop across the street from my building. From the time I left my house to the time I walked in the building was about 50 minutes. Free parking at the train station and EY picked up a BIG part of the DART/Train pass fee (cost me about $20 a month). Other than the Park-N-Ride system for folks who live WAY out, Houston has what, that stupid rail system between the Dome and Medical Center?
Yes, both cities are hotter than hell, but Dallas (usually) doesn't have the humidity and even when it's 100+, it doesn't feel that hot, especially in the shade.
The Chronicle is a rag, compared to almost any daily paper. It is just "too busy" and difficult to read.
Maybe after the political anti-Christ got through redrawing district lines Houston became more Republican, but I think in general, Dallas is a more conservative place than Houston. SJL...need I say more?
And Houston is just a sprawling, dirty, billboard infested place. Dallas has a much cleaner, newer look to it. If the Dallas mayor and council could just get off their asses and do something to downtown so that it doesn't become a wasteland weekdays after 6 and on weekends. All they need to do is look to their little brother Fort Worth. Their downtown is awesome.
Saturday, May 05, 2007
Dallas v. Houston
This could be an interesting thread. I love both cities and choose to live in neither at the moment. Both are vibrant, thriving cities.
Dallas has the edge on the symphony and Houston has the opera. In both one could dine in GREAT restaurant every night and never repeat for a year.
I grew up with the Cowboys (that loyalty only waned slightly when the thugs ruled the roost in the late 90s) and the hapless Rangers. Lived in Houston for the back-to-back championships and loved them more for the effect on my friends than for my own joy. LOVE the Astros but wish Pudge had never left Arlington.
Both are huge sprawling messes and mass transportation sucks but the people want it that way.
Dallas has some hills; Houston has the trees. Both are hotter than hell and both flood like hell.
Dallas has tornadoes; Houston has hurricanes.
Not sure about the conservative v. liberal thing. Both seem solidly red to me.
Although I haven't followed either paper lately, I've always thought the Morning News one of the nation's best.
Money drips in both cities for those who have the drive to earn it. Opportunity abounds.
Great secondary education easily available but both cities really have to defer to Austin...ok, Rice trumps SMU and UT but on a large scale or if one has a hyper-specialized interest...
I've love Denver but both Houston and Dallas are in Texas.
Dallas has the edge on the symphony and Houston has the opera. In both one could dine in GREAT restaurant every night and never repeat for a year.
I grew up with the Cowboys (that loyalty only waned slightly when the thugs ruled the roost in the late 90s) and the hapless Rangers. Lived in Houston for the back-to-back championships and loved them more for the effect on my friends than for my own joy. LOVE the Astros but wish Pudge had never left Arlington.
Both are huge sprawling messes and mass transportation sucks but the people want it that way.
Dallas has some hills; Houston has the trees. Both are hotter than hell and both flood like hell.
Dallas has tornadoes; Houston has hurricanes.
Not sure about the conservative v. liberal thing. Both seem solidly red to me.
Although I haven't followed either paper lately, I've always thought the Morning News one of the nation's best.
Money drips in both cities for those who have the drive to earn it. Opportunity abounds.
Great secondary education easily available but both cities really have to defer to Austin...ok, Rice trumps SMU and UT but on a large scale or if one has a hyper-specialized interest...
I've love Denver but both Houston and Dallas are in Texas.
Friday, May 04, 2007
Dallas Mavericks
Growing up as I did in Houston, I really bought into the whole “Houston vs. Dallas” thing. The 2 cities were, and probably still are, polar opposites. Liberal vs. Conservative; Democratic vs. Republican; blue collar vs. white collar; no zoning vs. strange liquor laws; Oilers vs. Cowboys. I could go on and on.
While I lived in Houston, I had no doubt that it was a much better place than Dallas to live. And of course the few times I visited Dallas always reinforced my beliefs. The only “advantage” that I saw that Dallas had over Houston were with its sports teams. The Astros/Rangers and the Rockets/Mavs were a wash (as all those teams basically sucked), so it was the hapless Oilers vs. the hated Cowboys. I had always wished that the Oilers would somehow win a Super Bowl before the Cowboys, but that was never to be. So it was with GREAT joy that I celebrated when the Rockets went back-to-back as NBA champions. My joy was as much that “we” had won one before Dallas as it was for just winning it. My hope was that the Rockets would be the only Texas team to win the NBA championship – to prove Houston’s dominance.
Then San Antonio wins a couple of championships. That’s okay – at least it wasn’t Dallas. Mark Cuban buys the Mavs and all of a sudden, they start getting good. Getting real good. They make it to the NBA finals last year, and go up 2 games to 0 going to Miami. Things weren’t looking too good for me…then something weird happens. Somehow the plans for the Mavs victory parade get leaked to the press and the Miami players use that as motivation to win 4 straight games and win the title. My dream is still alive! Which brings me to last night….
The Dallas Mavericks, the team with the best record in the NBA this season; the team with one of the all-time greatest regular season in NBA history; the team that the media here in Dallas has almost penciled in as champions as early as mid-season….loses to the 8th seed. The FIRST TIME IN NBA HISTORY that a 1st seed has lost to an 8th seed in a 7-game series in the 1st round!!!! Shock is not a strong enough word to describe the reaction of fans and media here today. You have to live here to understand how the media pumps up ANY and ALL Dallas sports teams. Even the Rangers, who have never done anything, are always hyped up to no end as the baseball season starts, only to wilt away in the summer heat, usually to finish last in their division. The hockey team (the Stars), the arena league football team (I don’t even know what they are called), all of them are always hyped to be one of, if not THE, best team in whatever league.
I think I’m the happiest person in “the metroplex” today. It’s been a great 12 months for me actually…..Mavs lose in 6 games in the NBA finals last year; Stars lose in the first round of the playoffs last year; Cowboys lose in the first round of the playoffs this year, Stars lose in the first round of the playoffs this year; and last night, the BIGGEST CHOKE JOB IN NBA PLAYOFF HISTORY.
I love it….it’s just too bad that after living in Dallas the past 7 years, it’s obvious that Dallas, as a city, is so much better than the hell-hole that is Houston.
While I lived in Houston, I had no doubt that it was a much better place than Dallas to live. And of course the few times I visited Dallas always reinforced my beliefs. The only “advantage” that I saw that Dallas had over Houston were with its sports teams. The Astros/Rangers and the Rockets/Mavs were a wash (as all those teams basically sucked), so it was the hapless Oilers vs. the hated Cowboys. I had always wished that the Oilers would somehow win a Super Bowl before the Cowboys, but that was never to be. So it was with GREAT joy that I celebrated when the Rockets went back-to-back as NBA champions. My joy was as much that “we” had won one before Dallas as it was for just winning it. My hope was that the Rockets would be the only Texas team to win the NBA championship – to prove Houston’s dominance.
Then San Antonio wins a couple of championships. That’s okay – at least it wasn’t Dallas. Mark Cuban buys the Mavs and all of a sudden, they start getting good. Getting real good. They make it to the NBA finals last year, and go up 2 games to 0 going to Miami. Things weren’t looking too good for me…then something weird happens. Somehow the plans for the Mavs victory parade get leaked to the press and the Miami players use that as motivation to win 4 straight games and win the title. My dream is still alive! Which brings me to last night….
The Dallas Mavericks, the team with the best record in the NBA this season; the team with one of the all-time greatest regular season in NBA history; the team that the media here in Dallas has almost penciled in as champions as early as mid-season….loses to the 8th seed. The FIRST TIME IN NBA HISTORY that a 1st seed has lost to an 8th seed in a 7-game series in the 1st round!!!! Shock is not a strong enough word to describe the reaction of fans and media here today. You have to live here to understand how the media pumps up ANY and ALL Dallas sports teams. Even the Rangers, who have never done anything, are always hyped up to no end as the baseball season starts, only to wilt away in the summer heat, usually to finish last in their division. The hockey team (the Stars), the arena league football team (I don’t even know what they are called), all of them are always hyped to be one of, if not THE, best team in whatever league.
I think I’m the happiest person in “the metroplex” today. It’s been a great 12 months for me actually…..Mavs lose in 6 games in the NBA finals last year; Stars lose in the first round of the playoffs last year; Cowboys lose in the first round of the playoffs this year, Stars lose in the first round of the playoffs this year; and last night, the BIGGEST CHOKE JOB IN NBA PLAYOFF HISTORY.
I love it….it’s just too bad that after living in Dallas the past 7 years, it’s obvious that Dallas, as a city, is so much better than the hell-hole that is Houston.
Wednesday, May 02, 2007
Hot on Tito's Trail
Dripping Springs Vodka.
Not buying all the self-hype but I did take a microscopic taste. It was pretty good.
Not buying all the self-hype but I did take a microscopic taste. It was pretty good.
Tuesday, May 01, 2007
Murdoch's bid for Dow
I think I'm pro. Murdoch is a creep but he does know news and marketing. If he could market the WSJ like he markets Fox News without watering down the paper, that could be a very good thing.
Kudlow starts to raise the subject here.
My would be girlfriend Peggy Noonan is scheduled for Dennis Miller tonight (tonight for me via KRLA); I'll be interested to see if she has anything to say on this.
Kudlow starts to raise the subject here.
My would be girlfriend Peggy Noonan is scheduled for Dennis Miller tonight (tonight for me via KRLA); I'll be interested to see if she has anything to say on this.
Christopher Hitchens: the Man I Love and Hate
Great article at Slate today on Tenet's new book; it includes this gem:
And now comes Tenet, the man who got everything wrong and who ran the agency that couldn't think straight, to ask us to sympathize with his moanings about "Iraq—who, me?"
HT: the Corner
And now comes Tenet, the man who got everything wrong and who ran the agency that couldn't think straight, to ask us to sympathize with his moanings about "Iraq—who, me?"
HT: the Corner
Re: Re: Re: Re: Sopranos
No Tivo, but with digital roadrunner I can go to HBO On Demand and call up any number of programs after their original air time and watch for free.
You have it exactly right. I did NOT need to see that. They could have made that kid creepy in a multitude of ways and, in fact, already had. That was just yucky beyond the pale. I still feel dirty.
You have it exactly right. I did NOT need to see that. They could have made that kid creepy in a multitude of ways and, in fact, already had. That was just yucky beyond the pale. I still feel dirty.
Re: Re: Re: The Sopranos
Scooter, how did you watch Sunday's episode last night? Did you finally get TiVo?
And....are you out because of content or because the quality is going downhill? I ask because I read something about the last episode - Vito Jr. in the shower (I'll leave it at that). I don't see how that (and something about Uncle Junior the episode before) is great tv.
I'm rethinking getting the DVD's....
And....are you out because of content or because the quality is going downhill? I ask because I read something about the last episode - Vito Jr. in the shower (I'll leave it at that). I don't see how that (and something about Uncle Junior the episode before) is great tv.
I'm rethinking getting the DVD's....
Monday, April 30, 2007
Oh I wish...
Pulling onto Lake Austin Boulevard today I look up and I'm right behind the Oscar Meyer Weinermobile.
I'm sure it must have been in Buda on Saturday for its annual event.
I'm sure it must have been in Buda on Saturday for its annual event.
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Wealth of Nations; PJ O'Rourke
There are those books "that changed the world" that the subtitle of my current read implies we all should have read. At about 900 pages in 18th C. English not counting preface, intro, and and all the stuff at the end, who's gonna read that?
This series by Atlantic Monthly Press allows us a Cliff's/Monarch Notes view into the works that we should have already read.
Adam Smith, we hardly knew ye.
This series by Atlantic Monthly Press allows us a Cliff's/Monarch Notes view into the works that we should have already read.
Adam Smith, we hardly knew ye.
Saturday, April 28, 2007
English-speaking Peoples Since 1900
Done.
As I suspected the last 20 years appeared to be much more journalism than history so I'll only throw out a couple of facts that intrigued me:
p. 572 According to a European Commission report in 2001, English was being spoken by more than one in three of 350M citizens of the EU, whereas fewer than one in ten spoke French outside France itself.
p. 573 ...today there are three non-native English speakers for every native one.....with 1.5B speakers worldwide, it is poised for global hegemony.
Wow. Now I wish I'd taken Spanish in school instead of French.
p.574 Despite Britain having just 1.3% of the world's population - and taking up less than 0.2% of the world's land area - English is today both the language of wealth and, just as importantly, of aspiration to wealth. It is not enough that many hundreds of millions should speak English as their first or second language, but the people who do so have on average higher per capita incomes than those who speak the other great world languages. Although there are many more Mandarin-speakers than English-speakers, they are only worth [Scooter: I lament the choice of words] £448B in total. Against that Russian-speakers are 'worth' [Scooter: fine, here he inserts the quotes] £801B, German-speakers £1,090B, Japanese-speakers £1,277B, but English-speakers are worth a staggering £4,271B - more than all the rest put together.
Mon Dieu!
In his conclusion, Roberts does his duty and cites many of the shames of the 20th C. English-speaking Peoples, which did not go unmentioned earlier in his History but I've not yet mentioned, e.g., the one hundred years from the end of American slavery until real progress for the American African-American and the disparate levels of wealth in the US but cited some facts that I've heard before from Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell about the American poor:
p. 639 Over 46% of America's poor - as defined by the US Government's Census Bureau - own their own homes [Scooter: I have a hard time with that one...must be a pretty generous definition of poor], 72% have washing machines, 60% own microwave ovens, 92% have colour TV sets, 76% have air-conditioning and 66% own one or more cars. 2/3s of poor households have an average of two rooms per person, and the average poor American has more living space than the average individual in Paris, London, Vienna or Athens [Scooter: Having stayed in many a pensione in Europe, I don't find this hard to swallow]. Obesity, rather than hunger or malnutrition, is the danger for the children of America's poor....
Finally, do the Brits use the phrase "in the event" the same way as we use "in any event?" I must have come across that a dozen time in the book and every time I had to reread the sentence. That was the conclusion to which I came.
Wonderful book that has left me wondering if I can tackle its inspiration.
As I suspected the last 20 years appeared to be much more journalism than history so I'll only throw out a couple of facts that intrigued me:
p. 572 According to a European Commission report in 2001, English was being spoken by more than one in three of 350M citizens of the EU, whereas fewer than one in ten spoke French outside France itself.
p. 573 ...today there are three non-native English speakers for every native one.....with 1.5B speakers worldwide, it is poised for global hegemony.
Wow. Now I wish I'd taken Spanish in school instead of French.
p.574 Despite Britain having just 1.3% of the world's population - and taking up less than 0.2% of the world's land area - English is today both the language of wealth and, just as importantly, of aspiration to wealth. It is not enough that many hundreds of millions should speak English as their first or second language, but the people who do so have on average higher per capita incomes than those who speak the other great world languages. Although there are many more Mandarin-speakers than English-speakers, they are only worth [Scooter: I lament the choice of words] £448B in total. Against that Russian-speakers are 'worth' [Scooter: fine, here he inserts the quotes] £801B, German-speakers £1,090B, Japanese-speakers £1,277B, but English-speakers are worth a staggering £4,271B - more than all the rest put together.
Mon Dieu!
In his conclusion, Roberts does his duty and cites many of the shames of the 20th C. English-speaking Peoples, which did not go unmentioned earlier in his History but I've not yet mentioned, e.g., the one hundred years from the end of American slavery until real progress for the American African-American and the disparate levels of wealth in the US but cited some facts that I've heard before from Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell about the American poor:
p. 639 Over 46% of America's poor - as defined by the US Government's Census Bureau - own their own homes [Scooter: I have a hard time with that one...must be a pretty generous definition of poor], 72% have washing machines, 60% own microwave ovens, 92% have colour TV sets, 76% have air-conditioning and 66% own one or more cars. 2/3s of poor households have an average of two rooms per person, and the average poor American has more living space than the average individual in Paris, London, Vienna or Athens [Scooter: Having stayed in many a pensione in Europe, I don't find this hard to swallow]. Obesity, rather than hunger or malnutrition, is the danger for the children of America's poor....
Finally, do the Brits use the phrase "in the event" the same way as we use "in any event?" I must have come across that a dozen time in the book and every time I had to reread the sentence. That was the conclusion to which I came.
Wonderful book that has left me wondering if I can tackle its inspiration.
Friday, April 27, 2007
Thursday, April 26, 2007
OMG: Edwards on Moral Authority and Hillary on Wal-Mart
Please go listen to this debate. This is just sad.
Holy Cow!
New terrorist threat...the former trial lawyer/Edwards says, "Blame America first." Look at the Democrat debate.
Democrat Debate
This is hideous. Could it be more clear that every candidate had the question posed them ahead of time? The only candidate who hasn't benefited from this is Hillary...she still sounds shrill and posed...she needs a much better team. However, she did have the best reply to the "what if we're hit again" question.
I did not hear the earliest parts of the debate so maybe the questioning method was disclosed but if not, then this is a farce.
I did not hear the earliest parts of the debate so maybe the questioning method was disclosed but if not, then this is a farce.
Holy Smokes: Joe Biden is running?
I turned on the Democrat debate and was shocked, shocked I say, to learn Biden was running again.
I was once fooled by him.
I haven't heard squat about his campaign this year.
I was once fooled by him.
I haven't heard squat about his campaign this year.
Re: Re: Re: Sopranos
I'm sure LJ is right about A&E, if one is going to judge, judge the real deal. I could have lived without almost all of the sex scenes (confession here, not all) but the violence and language is probably essential to a real judgment of the series.
Having said that, I haven't seen any of the A&E stuff so I can't say to what extent they are editing.
For my money, the first season of Rome was the best 12 episodes of TV. Pity that they had to cram so much into the second season, knowing that they were the final 12, effectively ruining it.
Having said that, I haven't seen any of the A&E stuff so I can't say to what extent they are editing.
For my money, the first season of Rome was the best 12 episodes of TV. Pity that they had to cram so much into the second season, knowing that they were the final 12, effectively ruining it.
Re: Re: The Sopranos
I've seen an episode or 2 on A&E. Since I'm "Mr. Free Speech", I don't want edited. I want to see it the way the writers/creators made it. How else can I judge whether or not it's the greatest television ever?
Re: Speaking of Mike Gallagher II
Yesterday and today he has been railing against the Tillman's and Jessica Lynch and their testimony in the hearings going on in DC. They have an agenda (as if not everyone there does), they are anti-war, blah blah blah. He keeps saying that Tillman was a hero and it didn't/shouldn't matter how he died. That the family got the truth. That friendly fire is a part of war. And he is right...and is very wrong.
It doesn't matter how he died. How he died shouldn't have effected his "hero" status. And I don't think it mattered to anyone...except the Army. That is the point. Gallagher keeps throwing out "alleged lies", "alleged facts", "perhaps the events were embellished", "the facts surrounding the event were murky". Please....EVERYONE in the Army that was involved knew from almost the minute he died what happened. The Army covered it up, the Army changed the story, the Army ordered people not to tell the truth. So it must have mattered to them. At his funeral/memorial service, the officer who recounted the events KNEW what he was saying was not truthful, the Army brass sitting there KNEW what was being said was not truthful, but they kept the story going. The Army has admitted it. So I don't know what is "alleged" or "murky" about that. The Army ordered someone who was there not to tell his brother, a fellow Ranger in the same platoon. The Army destroyed evidence. The Army posted guards outside a hospital room so a wounded soldier, who was injured in the same fire-fight, wouldn't tell anyone what really happened.
Since Gallagher is so good at putting himself in someones mind (the Tillman's family), allow me to do it. They just wanted to be told the truth. As soon as possible. The Army could have avoided all of this had they done so. By not, and dragging this out, the Tillman's got pissed and contacted their Congressman or Senator. And once those guys get involved, NOTHING good can happen. That is when you get hearings, that is when it all turns political and agenda's get involved. The Tillman's, at least at first, only had one agenda.
The truth.
It doesn't matter how he died. How he died shouldn't have effected his "hero" status. And I don't think it mattered to anyone...except the Army. That is the point. Gallagher keeps throwing out "alleged lies", "alleged facts", "perhaps the events were embellished", "the facts surrounding the event were murky". Please....EVERYONE in the Army that was involved knew from almost the minute he died what happened. The Army covered it up, the Army changed the story, the Army ordered people not to tell the truth. So it must have mattered to them. At his funeral/memorial service, the officer who recounted the events KNEW what he was saying was not truthful, the Army brass sitting there KNEW what was being said was not truthful, but they kept the story going. The Army has admitted it. So I don't know what is "alleged" or "murky" about that. The Army ordered someone who was there not to tell his brother, a fellow Ranger in the same platoon. The Army destroyed evidence. The Army posted guards outside a hospital room so a wounded soldier, who was injured in the same fire-fight, wouldn't tell anyone what really happened.
Since Gallagher is so good at putting himself in someones mind (the Tillman's family), allow me to do it. They just wanted to be told the truth. As soon as possible. The Army could have avoided all of this had they done so. By not, and dragging this out, the Tillman's got pissed and contacted their Congressman or Senator. And once those guys get involved, NOTHING good can happen. That is when you get hearings, that is when it all turns political and agenda's get involved. The Tillman's, at least at first, only had one agenda.
The truth.
Re: Speaking of Mike Gallagher
The first time he offered a hour of his program to the Phelps sisters was when they were going to show up/protest the funerals of the Amish children who were killed in the Amish school shooting. I listened to about half of that program. Even I, a very fervent advocate of free speech, was appalled. I understand his motivation in giving them air time, but they have no business on the airwaves. I heard him yesterday saying that they were going to be on again, but it was the last hour of the program and I had no way to hear it.
But my question is, while I understand (perhaps) why they do this, I don't understand why they don't also show up at the shooters funeral. If I understand their beliefs, the shooters/killers are sinners as well. So if you are going to show up at one, show up at the other. Then again, they lose the shock value and publicity if they attend the killers funeral.
But my question is, while I understand (perhaps) why they do this, I don't understand why they don't also show up at the shooters funeral. If I understand their beliefs, the shooters/killers are sinners as well. So if you are going to show up at one, show up at the other. Then again, they lose the shock value and publicity if they attend the killers funeral.
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Re: Sopranos
If you'd like to do it on the cheap (and I don't mean that disparagingly), there is an alternative. A&E is running what I assume to be a censored version.
Re: Speaking of Mike Gallagher
He's done this in the past (offered his program in lieu of) when they wanted to protest military burials. I actually admire that...but I still am not enamored of the program.
If Gallagher's gestures give them more publicity while not upsetting these tragedies, I'm all for it. Let them lose in the market of ideas.
If Gallagher's gestures give them more publicity while not upsetting these tragedies, I'm all for it. Let them lose in the market of ideas.
Speaking of Mike Gallagher
I listened to a bit of Tuesday's show when he had the Phelps sisters on. He had made a deal with them that if they would agree not to appear at the funerals of the Blacksburg victims, he would give them Tuesday's show to do their thing. I had never paid much attention to them or their church, Westboro Baptist. I'm not going to link them - their website name would make even Ann Coulter blush.
From what I had read about them, I thought they were just anti-gay nuts, which they are, but they actually have a theology that goes way beyond their signs and their anti-gay rhetoric, which I now see they do for the pub to reach what they perceive as the maximum audience. They believe (fervently is too weak a word) that it is a Christian's duty to rebuke non-Christians in an effort to make them see the error of their ways and become Christians. The rub is that if you don't believe in 24/7 rebuking of those who don't agree with Westboro, you're not a real Christian. They have 71 members of their church apparently, and their belief is that they are the only true Christians following the teachings of Jesus. Everyone else is destined for Hell.
The sisters are not dumb and both are lawyers (and no LJ I'm not claiming that lawyers are necessarily smart). But boy are they pissed off.
From what I had read about them, I thought they were just anti-gay nuts, which they are, but they actually have a theology that goes way beyond their signs and their anti-gay rhetoric, which I now see they do for the pub to reach what they perceive as the maximum audience. They believe (fervently is too weak a word) that it is a Christian's duty to rebuke non-Christians in an effort to make them see the error of their ways and become Christians. The rub is that if you don't believe in 24/7 rebuking of those who don't agree with Westboro, you're not a real Christian. They have 71 members of their church apparently, and their belief is that they are the only true Christians following the teachings of Jesus. Everyone else is destined for Hell.
The sisters are not dumb and both are lawyers (and no LJ I'm not claiming that lawyers are necessarily smart). But boy are they pissed off.
More Miller
Skipped around his website some last night and it appears that Mark Steyn will be on fairly regularly; Miller really schmoozes.
He also had Peggy Noonan (my fantasy girlfriend) on and he seemed pretty much as infatuated as I. I've read almost all her books and never miss a column. Best prose in the biz.
LJ, you may never be able to get beyond his schtick or his politics but I bet this is going to hit once he gets enough stations to drag him out of that time slot. Would that my local Talk Radio 1370 AM would dump Savage or Gallagher for him, not that I think Gallagher is even close to Savage regarding the cringe factor.
He also had Peggy Noonan (my fantasy girlfriend) on and he seemed pretty much as infatuated as I. I've read almost all her books and never miss a column. Best prose in the biz.
LJ, you may never be able to get beyond his schtick or his politics but I bet this is going to hit once he gets enough stations to drag him out of that time slot. Would that my local Talk Radio 1370 AM would dump Savage or Gallagher for him, not that I think Gallagher is even close to Savage regarding the cringe factor.
Re: Jonah Goldberg and Mark Steyn on US Air Carriers
Monday, April 23, 2007
The Stand
It's long, as you know. It's the only King book I've read where God shows up. In everything else I've read, there is Paranormal that may be Evil or may not. Certainly the Clown in It is evil but there's no countervailing god or God.
English-speaking Peoples Since 1900
I'm up to the 90s. The decade/chapter entitled The Wasted Breathing Space.
70s:
More favorable treatment of Nixon/Kissinger than I would have thought: the theory being that the political will of the 70s only allowed for Detente rather than aggressively pursuing the end of Communism. Nixon was rightfully excoriated for his economic policies as was Carter; Edward Heath, the Conservative Prime Minister even more so for most of his policies.
80s:
Thatcher and Reagan rightfully hallowed for their efforts both economically and in terms of foreign policy. Wish that the details of Reykjavik had been explored in greater detail.
In addition, I've always felt that administrations (and most other things) really need at least 20 years of distance before they are really treated properly from a historical (as opposed to a journalistic) perspective so from Reagan/Thatcher forward, I'm treating this a bit more like an opinion piece though there is certainly plenty of opinion in the first 80 years.
70s:
More favorable treatment of Nixon/Kissinger than I would have thought: the theory being that the political will of the 70s only allowed for Detente rather than aggressively pursuing the end of Communism. Nixon was rightfully excoriated for his economic policies as was Carter; Edward Heath, the Conservative Prime Minister even more so for most of his policies.
80s:
Thatcher and Reagan rightfully hallowed for their efforts both economically and in terms of foreign policy. Wish that the details of Reykjavik had been explored in greater detail.
In addition, I've always felt that administrations (and most other things) really need at least 20 years of distance before they are really treated properly from a historical (as opposed to a journalistic) perspective so from Reagan/Thatcher forward, I'm treating this a bit more like an opinion piece though there is certainly plenty of opinion in the first 80 years.
The rug in the Oval Office
If Hillary is going to lift up the rug in the Oval Office in 2009, she’d better hope it was cleaned thoroughly after her husband’s term. Yuck.
Re: The Sopranos
I loved the series the first two seasons. The succeeding seasons left me less impressed. I'm not sure if that was because of a drop in quality or if I increasingly lost interest due to the length of the hiatuses. I've continued watching, however, and so far I've loved this season.
Come to think of it, buying may be the perfect way to go.
Come to think of it, buying may be the perfect way to go.
Baghdad on the Bayou
From City Journal:
The rocketing crime rate suggests that New Orleans’s bad guys are coming back to the city in disproportionate numbers. That shouldn’t come as a surprise. The hoodlums, mostly members of an entrenched underclass, are impulsive and mobile, while working- and middle-class New Orleanians face big roadblocks to returning, such as shuttered schools. Some of the lawbreakers may have hustled back, too, because they were having a hard time adjusting to functional cities like Houston, which initially took in more than 200,000 storm evacuees. Unlike New Orleans, which has long failed at crime fighting, Houston actually arrests, charges, convicts, and imprisons its criminals (see “Houston’s Noble Experiment,” Spring 2006).
And, of course, Michael has made similar comments about the crime rate increasing in Houston as a result of the Katrina cretins here, here, here and here.
The rocketing crime rate suggests that New Orleans’s bad guys are coming back to the city in disproportionate numbers. That shouldn’t come as a surprise. The hoodlums, mostly members of an entrenched underclass, are impulsive and mobile, while working- and middle-class New Orleanians face big roadblocks to returning, such as shuttered schools. Some of the lawbreakers may have hustled back, too, because they were having a hard time adjusting to functional cities like Houston, which initially took in more than 200,000 storm evacuees. Unlike New Orleans, which has long failed at crime fighting, Houston actually arrests, charges, convicts, and imprisons its criminals (see “Houston’s Noble Experiment,” Spring 2006).
And, of course, Michael has made similar comments about the crime rate increasing in Houston as a result of the Katrina cretins here, here, here and here.
The Sopranos
While I am on the cutting edge on many things, especially as compared to my com padres, I am not as it relates to television. I am rarely, if ever, "on" a program or series before it gets big or wins awards or is hyped as the next "best thing ever".
Case in point: "Seinfeld". I had heard of it, but had never watched it when it was in it's early years. I'm in a car with fellow SSJ Michael and he is talking about it and keeps saying that "dude, you are George. You are SO George." I had no idea what he was talking about, nor would he explain how I was "so George". So, my interest piqued, I watched. And watched and kept watching.
In the DVD age that we are now in, I've only bought 2 TV series. They are Ken Burns' "The Civil War" and "Seinfeld". I can, and have, watched both of these multiple times. As for "Seinfeld", I'm anxiously waiting for season 8 to come out in June.
Which brings me to "The Sopranos". As I've mentioned before, I have never had HBO, so I've never seen any series produced or aired on HBO. But with this being the final season (as I understand) of "The Sopranos", I'm seeing article after article talking about how it is the greatest TV series ever. EVER. Can that be? I mean, the reviewers and pundits and authors can't ALL be wrong, can they? So now I'm thinking, I have to check it out. I have to watch it.
I'm trying to decide if I want to start buying the DVD's, starting with season 1. My concern is that while it may be great, will it and can it stand up to multiple viewings, ala "Seinfeld". Or will I watch all the episodes, say yes, that was very good, even great, but never watch them again?
In thinking about the multiple viewing question, is that something inherent to the comedy genre? How many times have I watched the great comedies over and over again? Even though I know the story, the jokes, the twists, it is still entertaining and I still laugh out loud at the same time every time. But with a drama, when you know the outcome, does it lose something?Loses the "kick" or "punch"? And therein lies my conundrum. If "The Sopranos" is a great as the hype is suggesting, it should be able to pass the multiple viewing test.
What to do? What to do....
Case in point: "Seinfeld". I had heard of it, but had never watched it when it was in it's early years. I'm in a car with fellow SSJ Michael and he is talking about it and keeps saying that "dude, you are George. You are SO George." I had no idea what he was talking about, nor would he explain how I was "so George". So, my interest piqued, I watched. And watched and kept watching.
In the DVD age that we are now in, I've only bought 2 TV series. They are Ken Burns' "The Civil War" and "Seinfeld". I can, and have, watched both of these multiple times. As for "Seinfeld", I'm anxiously waiting for season 8 to come out in June.
Which brings me to "The Sopranos". As I've mentioned before, I have never had HBO, so I've never seen any series produced or aired on HBO. But with this being the final season (as I understand) of "The Sopranos", I'm seeing article after article talking about how it is the greatest TV series ever. EVER. Can that be? I mean, the reviewers and pundits and authors can't ALL be wrong, can they? So now I'm thinking, I have to check it out. I have to watch it.
I'm trying to decide if I want to start buying the DVD's, starting with season 1. My concern is that while it may be great, will it and can it stand up to multiple viewings, ala "Seinfeld". Or will I watch all the episodes, say yes, that was very good, even great, but never watch them again?
In thinking about the multiple viewing question, is that something inherent to the comedy genre? How many times have I watched the great comedies over and over again? Even though I know the story, the jokes, the twists, it is still entertaining and I still laugh out loud at the same time every time. But with a drama, when you know the outcome, does it lose something?Loses the "kick" or "punch"? And therein lies my conundrum. If "The Sopranos" is a great as the hype is suggesting, it should be able to pass the multiple viewing test.
What to do? What to do....
Alaska
I struggled to finish. I usually don't have a problem getting through Michener and for the past few years I have been reading lots of stuff about this part of the world. Perhaps it was the difficultly trying to follow characters with very similar names (Russians, Aleuts, Inuit, etc.). Or it was that I really wasn't as interested in the history of Alaska as I thought I would be. Whatever the reason, I was bored with it about halfway through and only finished because I hate not finishing a book I start. Not his best effort.
Sunday, April 22, 2007
English-speaking Peoples
Roberts has gone too far. His attack on The X-Files as indicative of the English-speaking peoples' tendency to question authority and look for conspiracies is beyond the pale.
OK, I know he was, as a former boss of mine used to say engaging in a literary device, "I exaggerate to illustrate." But, The X-Files? How else am I to fall asleep at night?
OK, I know he was, as a former boss of mine used to say engaging in a literary device, "I exaggerate to illustrate." But, The X-Files? How else am I to fall asleep at night?
Boomsday
Ugly and unfair review today in the NYT Book Review. The authors are apparently well-qualified to review Buckley's book, having written this masterpiece.
My review of Boomsday here.
My review of Boomsday here.
Friday, April 20, 2007
Re: Blacksburg question II
Rich Lowry notes a statistic on "rampage killings" and one doctor's take on the recent rise of such events: "According to an extensive survey in the New York Times a few years ago, about half of rampage killings are committed by mentally ill people, a much higher percentage than the roughly five percent that commit all murders. Dr. E. Fuller Torrey, president of the Virginia-based Treatment Advocacy Center, believes there has been a rise in such killings in the past 20 years, which coincides with the period when we have dumped many severely mental ill people out into society without treating them."
Charles Krauthammer: "In a previous age, such a troubled soul might have found himself at the state mental hospital rather than a state university. But in a trade-off that a decent and tolerant society makes with open eyes, we allow freedom from straitjackets to those on the psychic edge, knowing that such tolerance runs very rare but very terrible risk."
Turns out Charles Whitman had a brain tumor that may have affected his mental state.
Charles Krauthammer: "In a previous age, such a troubled soul might have found himself at the state mental hospital rather than a state university. But in a trade-off that a decent and tolerant society makes with open eyes, we allow freedom from straitjackets to those on the psychic edge, knowing that such tolerance runs very rare but very terrible risk."
Turns out Charles Whitman had a brain tumor that may have affected his mental state.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Redd - the end
I spent a lot of time on the blog today (for better or worse) and have been back and forth reading and checking. The more I see "redd" the more I hate it.
Therefore, on the very day [update note: actually the next day] that I called for a revolution: I rescind that call, ask you to sheath your weapons, and go with the flow. For now.
"This is not the time, but time is on our side."
Therefore, on the very day [update note: actually the next day] that I called for a revolution: I rescind that call, ask you to sheath your weapons, and go with the flow. For now.
"This is not the time, but time is on our side."
Our visitors today
include persons in Canada, Puerto Rico, Spain, Brazil, and Chile. No kidding.
UPDATE: I'm not buying it. I can't get a referring URL for any of them, must be a glitch. Doh!
Re: Blacksburg question
I saw just a bit of the video, but I think I've redd enough to know that this guy wasn't simply very pissed-off, he was mentally unstable. There are dozens of posts at DU (!) from people who know or knew people who were psychotic (and one who was himself), and they all seem to think this guy was a classic case. If that's so, 30 years ago he would have been in a facility and couldn't have done this. I'm not suggesting that everyone who loses it in the way LJ describes is mental (I don't think for instance that anybody believes the Columbine guys were mental) but perhaps that is one part of the puzzle: We used to lock them up, now we don't.
NBC
I don't really have big objection to NBC's airing of the tape save for the insensitivity to the families so soon after the event. Having said that, Why not say:
We received this package from the killer, but we here at NBC have chosen not to air [even if only temporarily] the video. We may air it at a future time once things have settled down. For now, though, out of respect for the families and the Hokie family, we withhold.
This would have been the way to go...sing our own praises while doing the right thing.
We received this package from the killer, but we here at NBC have chosen not to air [even if only temporarily] the video. We may air it at a future time once things have settled down. For now, though, out of respect for the families and the Hokie family, we withhold.
This would have been the way to go...sing our own praises while doing the right thing.
Re: Interesting redd fact
There won't be salmon redds when I go to Canada in August, but plenty of trout.
I'd redd all that Teddy Roosevelt simplifying the language stuff before. Although I have the exact same difficulty with "read" in the past tense, I think I'm a bit Frenchman-like regarding the language. Now that English is the lingua franca, I hesitate to monkey with a good thing.
I'd redd all that Teddy Roosevelt simplifying the language stuff before. Although I have the exact same difficulty with "read" in the past tense, I think I'm a bit Frenchman-like regarding the language. Now that English is the lingua franca, I hesitate to monkey with a good thing.
Re: Blacksburg
LJ,
I couldn't agree more about these leaps that we've taken. Used to be that if one got fired/dumped, one sought a new job or a new squeeze; now we open fire. We live in the best of times materially. The poorest in this country live like only royalty could aspire to only a hundred years ago yet even the smallest deprivation, real or perceived, sparks acts like this?
This guy was deprived in no measure.
I cannot fathom this.
I couldn't agree more about these leaps that we've taken. Used to be that if one got fired/dumped, one sought a new job or a new squeeze; now we open fire. We live in the best of times materially. The poorest in this country live like only royalty could aspire to only a hundred years ago yet even the smallest deprivation, real or perceived, sparks acts like this?
This guy was deprived in no measure.
I cannot fathom this.
Re: Hostage
Saw the movie a couple of years ago but thought it forgettable. No idea what the "I" stands for....
Interesting redd fact
"An egg sac or collection can be called a 'redd' as in 'salmon redd' for the eggs attached to the stream bottom. Specifically, a salmon redd is the space at the bottom of a stream that a spawning salmon makes for its eggs."
Prager channels Scooter
"I believe that this early healing talk is both foolish and immoral.
It is foolish because one does not speak about healing the same day (or week or perhaps even month) that one is traumatized -- especially by evil. One must be allowed time for anger and grief. To speak of healing and 'closure' before one goes through those other emotions is to speak not of healing but of suppression.
Not to allow people time to experience their natural, and noble, instincts to feel rage and grief actually deprives them of the ability to heal in the long run. After all, if there is no rage and grief, what is there to heal from?"
It is foolish because one does not speak about healing the same day (or week or perhaps even month) that one is traumatized -- especially by evil. One must be allowed time for anger and grief. To speak of healing and 'closure' before one goes through those other emotions is to speak not of healing but of suppression.
Not to allow people time to experience their natural, and noble, instincts to feel rage and grief actually deprives them of the ability to heal in the long run. After all, if there is no rage and grief, what is there to heal from?"
Site meter
I just noticed we had lost our site meter. Guess it dropped off when we made the switch to new Blogger. I've put it back so we can again marvel at our extensive readership.
Blacksburg II
Michael - just for your information, the original draft of my post below had several...."begs the question..." references. And though I relish in pushing certain buttons, I felt in this case it would be a distraction.
Blacksburg
To date I haven’t commented on the events in Blacksburg. I can say in all honesty that I haven’t seen 1 minute of news coverage on this. I have heard snippets here and there on the radio, mostly discussions on 1) what the school administration and police officials did or did not do and 2) whether or not the video/ writings/pictures that this guy sent to NBC should or should not be broadcast. What I would like to hear a discussion about is the how (not in how it was done, but in how have we, as a society, gotten to the point of anger = mass killing).
How have we gone from middle or high school “angst” issues (bullies, depression, break-ups with girlfriends, etc.) that used to be settled with, at worst, fist-fights across the street from the school that lasted maybe 10-15 minutes to taking multiple weapons to school and killing not just the bully or the ex-girlfriend, but seemingly random others, then killing yourself?
How have we gone from “road rage” issues (slow drivers, getting cut-off, not turning right on red) that used to be settled with shaking a fist or finger gestures to ramming the other vehicle/running them off the road and/or pulling out a gun and shooting them?
How have we gone from getting fired/let go/downsized from your job that used to be settled by yelling at your boss or going to the local bar and getting drunk to first killing your spouse and/or children, then going to your ex-employers office, killing the boss and any other random employees that you run into, then killing yourself?
I truly can’t comprehend the leap that Americans, for the most part, have made in this regard. Is part of the problem about our understanding of the “why” or “how” the fact that professionals don’t have the opportunity, after the event, to talk to these individuals because for the most part, the event ends in their death, usually by their own hand? Is part of the problem the American, as compared to the rest of the world, “gun culture”? Is part of the problem the individual freedoms that we enjoy which make it more difficult for authorities to more closely monitor (observation, arrest, confinement, etc.) those in our midst that have been identified by others as potential “problems” or “risks”?
I’m not very interested in discussions about “triggers” or what may or may not have happened in these people’s past. I would hazard to guess that break-ups and parental abuse and depression and stress and mental illness have been with us for eons. The causes have always been there – it’s the effect that has changed and escalated.
How have we gone from middle or high school “angst” issues (bullies, depression, break-ups with girlfriends, etc.) that used to be settled with, at worst, fist-fights across the street from the school that lasted maybe 10-15 minutes to taking multiple weapons to school and killing not just the bully or the ex-girlfriend, but seemingly random others, then killing yourself?
How have we gone from “road rage” issues (slow drivers, getting cut-off, not turning right on red) that used to be settled with shaking a fist or finger gestures to ramming the other vehicle/running them off the road and/or pulling out a gun and shooting them?
How have we gone from getting fired/let go/downsized from your job that used to be settled by yelling at your boss or going to the local bar and getting drunk to first killing your spouse and/or children, then going to your ex-employers office, killing the boss and any other random employees that you run into, then killing yourself?
I truly can’t comprehend the leap that Americans, for the most part, have made in this regard. Is part of the problem about our understanding of the “why” or “how” the fact that professionals don’t have the opportunity, after the event, to talk to these individuals because for the most part, the event ends in their death, usually by their own hand? Is part of the problem the American, as compared to the rest of the world, “gun culture”? Is part of the problem the individual freedoms that we enjoy which make it more difficult for authorities to more closely monitor (observation, arrest, confinement, etc.) those in our midst that have been identified by others as potential “problems” or “risks”?
I’m not very interested in discussions about “triggers” or what may or may not have happened in these people’s past. I would hazard to guess that break-ups and parental abuse and depression and stress and mental illness have been with us for eons. The causes have always been there – it’s the effect that has changed and escalated.
More "redd"
From the Journal of the Simplified Spelling Society:
"When we did this we found that we could make these words regular in most cases by changing only one letter. These you can see in our book called Bridges to Old Spelling. Here is a sample line from that book:
good new spelling: hedd bredd redd (p.t.) dredd reddy.
bad old spelling: head bread read dread ready.
But why, you may ask, use double-d? Why not bred, red, led? For two reasons:
1. If you read red, led, bred, in a sentence they suggest a quite different meaning. In new spelling we save every semantic difference just as we do in old spelling.
2. Our experiments prove that the eye stumbles when it runs across a word with one letter missing. But good reading forbids stumbling, it demands instantaneous comprehension."
TR was an advocate of phonetic spelling:
"During his presidency, Roosevelt tried but did not succeed to advance the cause of simplified spelling. He tried to force government to adopt the system, sending an order to the Public Printer to use the system in all public documents. The order was obeyed, and among the documents thus printed was the President's special message regarding the Panama Canal. The New York World translated the Thanksgiving Day proclamation:
When nearly three centuries ago, the first settlers came to the country which has become this great republic, that confronted not only hardship and privashun, but terrible risk of their lives. . . . The custom has now become national and hallowed by immemorial usage.
The reform annoyed the public, forcing him to rescind the order. Roosevelt's friend, literary critic Brander Matthews, one of the chief advocates of the reform, remonstrated with him for abandoning the effort. Roosevelt replied on December 16: 'I could not by fighting have kept the new spelling in, and it was evidently worse than useless to go into an undignified contest when I was beaten. Do you know that the one word as to which I thought the new spelling was wrong — thru — was more responsible than anything else for our discomfiture?' Next summer Roosevelt was watching a naval review when a launch marked 'Pres Bot' chugged ostentatiously by. The President waved and laughed with delight."
"When we did this we found that we could make these words regular in most cases by changing only one letter. These you can see in our book called Bridges to Old Spelling. Here is a sample line from that book:
good new spelling: hedd bredd redd (p.t.) dredd reddy.
bad old spelling: head bread read dread ready.
But why, you may ask, use double-d? Why not bred, red, led? For two reasons:
1. If you read red, led, bred, in a sentence they suggest a quite different meaning. In new spelling we save every semantic difference just as we do in old spelling.
2. Our experiments prove that the eye stumbles when it runs across a word with one letter missing. But good reading forbids stumbling, it demands instantaneous comprehension."
TR was an advocate of phonetic spelling:
"During his presidency, Roosevelt tried but did not succeed to advance the cause of simplified spelling. He tried to force government to adopt the system, sending an order to the Public Printer to use the system in all public documents. The order was obeyed, and among the documents thus printed was the President's special message regarding the Panama Canal. The New York World translated the Thanksgiving Day proclamation:
When nearly three centuries ago, the first settlers came to the country which has become this great republic, that confronted not only hardship and privashun, but terrible risk of their lives. . . . The custom has now become national and hallowed by immemorial usage.
The reform annoyed the public, forcing him to rescind the order. Roosevelt's friend, literary critic Brander Matthews, one of the chief advocates of the reform, remonstrated with him for abandoning the effort. Roosevelt replied on December 16: 'I could not by fighting have kept the new spelling in, and it was evidently worse than useless to go into an undignified contest when I was beaten. Do you know that the one word as to which I thought the new spelling was wrong — thru — was more responsible than anything else for our discomfiture?' Next summer Roosevelt was watching a naval review when a launch marked 'Pres Bot' chugged ostentatiously by. The President waved and laughed with delight."
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
The Watchman
Joe Pike. He's a mono-syllabic Jack Reacher without a sense of humor. Which is funny if you know Reacher.
The Watchman
The Watchman
Redd
I deleted the earlier reference so I'll duplicate it here: I've always had a hiccup reading "read" if it's in the past tense and there isn't a contextual clue that it is the past tense.
It seems to me that "redd" would eliminate my problem. Let's try it; maybe we'll start a movement.
It seems to me that "redd" would eliminate my problem. Let's try it; maybe we'll start a movement.
Re: King Hack
Although I've only read, er, redd, two of his novels, I've always thought him an artist, at least linguistically. Pure beauty with the language.
Danse Macabre
Bagged it halfway through. For serious students of the genre only I think. I have not read/redd most of the books or seen most of the movies referenced, so was at a distinct disadvantage. Two more points: 1. King's a good writer, and this book shows he's a scholar by any measure of the word. I hate it when he is dismissed as a hack. 2. It's fairly clear to any persistent reader of King's fiction that he's an Unreconstructed Lefty. This non-fiction makes it crystal.
Danse Macabre
Danse Macabre
Scooter a Racist
I love History of the English-speaking Peoples Since 1900 so far, so I am a white supremacist.
From Jonah Goldberg at The Corner, Johann Hari has written, “Pigmentation—the old basis for dominance—is now discredited, so he [Andrew Roberts] has politely switched to linguistics.”
Or so Hari contends Roberts has advised George W. Bush. I know nothing of the Springbokers so I hope I don't eventually find out I have been duped, but I'll be shocked, shocked I say, if that turns out to be so.
It just couldn't be because we (the pigmentally-challenged) have gotten some things right. I personally prefer the term "The West" but that might take in too many of the EU. Probably too much Tolkien influence.
From Jonah Goldberg at The Corner, Johann Hari has written, “Pigmentation—the old basis for dominance—is now discredited, so he [Andrew Roberts] has politely switched to linguistics.”
Or so Hari contends Roberts has advised George W. Bush. I know nothing of the Springbokers so I hope I don't eventually find out I have been duped, but I'll be shocked, shocked I say, if that turns out to be so.
It just couldn't be because we (the pigmentally-challenged) have gotten some things right. I personally prefer the term "The West" but that might take in too many of the EU. Probably too much Tolkien influence.
Mona Charen channels Scooter
"Yesterday, literally before the blood was cold at Virginia Tech, I heard some university official telling the press that they planned to import a phalanx of psychologists and counselors so that the 'healing' could begin. Sorry, but this is unnatural. When something so monstrous happens, you need time for shock, rage, even for numbness. A decent interval is required before you can or frankly should think about 'healing.' The therapeutic instinct, so ingrained in our culture, feels almost indecent."
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
"Healing" in Blacksburg
After 9/11 when the late Peter Jennings was hosting a bunch of kids on the following Saturday on an ABC Saturday Morning Special, I made an unfortunate comment to my hostess essentially saying, "What what the heck do we care about what these kids have to say?"
She, rightfully so, shot me lasers. After a bit, I apologized.
The idea that we should already be calling for healing without a period for rage and then mourning strikes me as premature.
She, rightfully so, shot me lasers. After a bit, I apologized.
The idea that we should already be calling for healing without a period for rage and then mourning strikes me as premature.
Don't know if I can do this without audio...
but for the last several years I've noticed something aurally annoying to yours truly.
The sound made by the letters "tt" in the English language as spoken by Americans, particularly Californians.
There is an ad (for Efax I think) running on the Hewitt show lately that has pushed me over the edge. Generalissimo Duane says, "...and click on the radio 'button' and enter Hugh Hewitt...."
The way he says "button" sounds to me like he is pronouncing, very quickly, both Ts. It sounds like, "but-tin." Again, the two "t" sounds are said very quickly, but it just drives me nuts. Isn't it pronounced "bŭt´n?"
OK, thanks to bartleby.com maybe I can do this audibly.
This is really embarrassing but the first time I noticed it was in the movie Clueless about 10-12 years ago.
What a misanthropic curmudgeon am I.
The sound made by the letters "tt" in the English language as spoken by Americans, particularly Californians.
There is an ad (for Efax I think) running on the Hewitt show lately that has pushed me over the edge. Generalissimo Duane says, "...and click on the radio 'button' and enter Hugh Hewitt...."
The way he says "button" sounds to me like he is pronouncing, very quickly, both Ts. It sounds like, "but-tin." Again, the two "t" sounds are said very quickly, but it just drives me nuts. Isn't it pronounced "bŭt´n?"
OK, thanks to bartleby.com maybe I can do this audibly.
This is really embarrassing but the first time I noticed it was in the movie Clueless about 10-12 years ago.
What a misanthropic curmudgeon am I.
Re: Babe
Didn't hear the show so I can't comment on the substance but the "Babe" use is almost as annoying as Laura Ingraham's use of the "royal we."
And yes, I've adored Michelle Malkin since about 1998. Her sites are here and here and in the links section to the right of this post--Hot Air. (Warning, she periodically blasts Olbermann.)
Not sure I get the "taken out of context" issue, to me, context is essential. If not in context, how many of my comments could nail me to the tree? Certainly he might have been using the context argument as crutch, but I didn't hear the comments so I don't know.
Tonight he's blasting the Second Amendment.
And yes, I've adored Michelle Malkin since about 1998. Her sites are here and here and in the links section to the right of this post--Hot Air. (Warning, she periodically blasts Olbermann.)
Not sure I get the "taken out of context" issue, to me, context is essential. If not in context, how many of my comments could nail me to the tree? Certainly he might have been using the context argument as crutch, but I didn't hear the comments so I don't know.
Tonight he's blasting the Second Amendment.
Another Dennis Miller Update
Found out yesterday that he is on a local station here in Dallas at 8pm. So I thought I would give him a listen. I tuned in around 9:30pm and I lasted all of about 3 minutes, maybe. I don't know who he was talking to, but I could couldn't get past all the "babe" references. I don't have a transcript, so I'm having to do this from memory:
"So, babe, I mean I saw you on Hannity & Colmes the other night and what got you all amped up? I mean, babe, we're just sitting here, taking normally and while I disagree with you in some areas, I feel like we have a connection and I can at least hear what you are trying to get across. The other night, what got you so worked up man, talk to me babe."
But as amazing as that was, the response from his quest was even better. I assume the guest was on H&C along with Michelle Malkin (I have no idea who she is - I'm sure Mike and Scooter do). So as the guest is trying to explain what got him so amped up, Dennis breaks in and this exchange takes place - again, from memory):
Dennis: "I mean, babe, you called her a prostitute - where did that come from? I mean, man, a prostitute?"
Guest: "Yea, I called her that, but you have to understand, I meant it in a political sense. I said it in a political context - I didn't call her a 'real' prostitute, I was calling her a 'political' prostitute."
What??
What I gathered was that the guest didn't explain his context on H&C, nor did he throw in the "real" vs "political" part. He just used the term "prostitute" and everyone just missed his "context".
I just love the whole "taken out of context" arguement that most pundits take when they are called on their comments. I don't even think that Dennis was calling this guy out for what he said, he was just wondering what got him so worked up. But the guest went immediately to the "taken out of context" defense.
By 9:35 I had tuned out. I doubt I'll be tuning back in any time soon, babe.
"So, babe, I mean I saw you on Hannity & Colmes the other night and what got you all amped up? I mean, babe, we're just sitting here, taking normally and while I disagree with you in some areas, I feel like we have a connection and I can at least hear what you are trying to get across. The other night, what got you so worked up man, talk to me babe."
But as amazing as that was, the response from his quest was even better. I assume the guest was on H&C along with Michelle Malkin (I have no idea who she is - I'm sure Mike and Scooter do). So as the guest is trying to explain what got him so amped up, Dennis breaks in and this exchange takes place - again, from memory):
Dennis: "I mean, babe, you called her a prostitute - where did that come from? I mean, man, a prostitute?"
Guest: "Yea, I called her that, but you have to understand, I meant it in a political sense. I said it in a political context - I didn't call her a 'real' prostitute, I was calling her a 'political' prostitute."
What??
What I gathered was that the guest didn't explain his context on H&C, nor did he throw in the "real" vs "political" part. He just used the term "prostitute" and everyone just missed his "context".
I just love the whole "taken out of context" arguement that most pundits take when they are called on their comments. I don't even think that Dennis was calling this guy out for what he said, he was just wondering what got him so worked up. But the guest went immediately to the "taken out of context" defense.
By 9:35 I had tuned out. I doubt I'll be tuning back in any time soon, babe.
Sunday, April 15, 2007
Beyond the Beltway
I know I'm the only SSJ, er, not "alum," uh, proprietor who lives alone but does anybody besides me listen occasionally to Beyond the Beltway on Sunday evenings? Although some of the guests are beyond the pale, I generally find them to be genuinely "fair and balanced."
I know, I need a life. At least I don't stay up late on Sundays to listen to the godfather of the Political Internet.
I know, I need a life. At least I don't stay up late on Sundays to listen to the godfather of the Political Internet.
Friday, April 13, 2007
Victor Davis Hanson's Dream
He dreamt that the British Marines fought back, but:
And then I woke up, remembering that the West of old lives only in dreams. Yes, the new religion of the post-Westerner is neither the Enlightenment nor Christianity, but the gospel of the Path of Least Resistance — one that must lead inevitably to gratification rather than sacrifice.
Would that his dream would come true.
And then I woke up, remembering that the West of old lives only in dreams. Yes, the new religion of the post-Westerner is neither the Enlightenment nor Christianity, but the gospel of the Path of Least Resistance — one that must lead inevitably to gratification rather than sacrifice.
Would that his dream would come true.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Re: The dirty 30
I read it and I'll report that I read 160 pages of Moby Dick. Literally nothing else. OK, a little Bible, very little Shakespeare, maybe parts of the US documents. Nothing else. There. Now you know the vastness of my ignorance.
Or do I?
*Scooter: "alum": "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Or do I?
*Scooter: "alum": "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Dennis Miller Update
He does seem to be getting guests including Rudy, Barone, Thomas Friedman, VDH and today Jeb Bush. List of audio files available here.
Hewitt's 30 Must Reads
Hugh Hewitt in his Wednesday third hour had a discussion on the 30 books everyone should read:
And so I conspired with David Allen White, professor extraordinaire at the United States Naval Academy, where he’s been teaching Shakespeare and other matters to the mid-shipmen for more than a quarter century, and John Mark Reynolds, professor of philosophy at Biola University, and the head of the Torrey Honors program there, to put together a reading list, and it’s the top 30 books that every one of you ought to have read, and certainly freshmen and sophomores ought to have read.
The full transcript is here and the audio here. It's embarrassing how few I've read but I bet confidently that I'm the only SSJ alum who's read Boethius (just a treatise on the Trinity, not the work discussed on HH, The Consolation of Philosophy).
And so I conspired with David Allen White, professor extraordinaire at the United States Naval Academy, where he’s been teaching Shakespeare and other matters to the mid-shipmen for more than a quarter century, and John Mark Reynolds, professor of philosophy at Biola University, and the head of the Torrey Honors program there, to put together a reading list, and it’s the top 30 books that every one of you ought to have read, and certainly freshmen and sophomores ought to have read.
The full transcript is here and the audio here. It's embarrassing how few I've read but I bet confidently that I'm the only SSJ alum who's read Boethius (just a treatise on the Trinity, not the work discussed on HH, The Consolation of Philosophy).
Re: Mobil Pegasus
Sorry, LJ, but I just love that old building. I could see the Proud Winged Horse from my boyhood home (if I stood on the fence).
Re: Mobil Pegasus
I am respectfully requesting a moratorium on anything related to 1) Mobil 2) Pegasus 3) Exxon 4) ExxonMobil for reasons that I don't think need to be rehashed.
I'm still rather bitter.
I'm still rather bitter.
Mobil Pegasus
A Dallas icon if there was one, the Mobil Horse sits atop the Magnolia Hotel, site of the old Magnolia Oil Company, which became Mobil. The horse was erected in 1934, on the 29 story building, which when it was built in 1922, was the tallest building west of the Mississippi.
RE: Jenny Agutter
Ok, now that I am able to post, I’ll try these again:
The "Zales" Building.
And don't forget the Fort Worth Watergardens.
I'm trying to figure out how to post some pics of the REAL Mobil Building with my beloved Red Pegasus. Great building.
The "Zales" Building.
And don't forget the Fort Worth Watergardens.
I'm trying to figure out how to post some pics of the REAL Mobil Building with my beloved Red Pegasus. Great building.
RE: Jenny Agutter
When the Mobil/Zales Complex was built in the 70s, it was considered "cutting edge."
Re: Jenny Agutter
I read Scooters comment about the movie being filmed at the Zale's Building in Dallas. That building (a complex actually) was sold to Mobil and was in fact where I worked when I transferred up here after the merger. The Mobil folks liked to talk about that movie being filmed there. EM still owns the property and has been trying to sell it for many years - so far no takers. I've never seen "Logan's Run" - I guess need to just to see if I can recognize anything. The whole place just looked like buildings to me - nothing "futuristic".
Vonnegut
If I could draw a picture that might remind you of a spider or might remind you of something else I might do it right here. And so it goes.
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Update on Tito's Update
From an April 9, 2007, press release: "Expansion is in the plans, and despite rumors, Beveridge says he has no plans to cash in on his growing success."
Monday, April 09, 2007
Re: Damascus Nancy
Andrew C. McCarthy at NRO chimes in on Scooter's thoughts about Damascus Nancy, and goes a great deal beyond my analysis of the violation of the Logan Act:
It is settled beyond peradventure that the authority of the United States over the conduct of foreign relations rests exclusively with the executive branch. As John Marshall, later to become the nation’s most important Chief Justice, famously observed, “The President is the sole organ of the nation in its external affairs, and its sole representative with foreign nations.… The [executive] department is entrusted with the whole foreign intercourse of the nation.” In 1936, the Supreme Court explicitly acknowledged in its Curtiss-Wright Export decision, the “delicate, plenary and exclusive power of the President as the sole organ of the federal government in the field of international relations[.]”
I agree with McCarthy that this is about teaching and not prosecuting; why prosecute politics? This is a very "teachable" moment but moments are fleeting.
It is settled beyond peradventure that the authority of the United States over the conduct of foreign relations rests exclusively with the executive branch. As John Marshall, later to become the nation’s most important Chief Justice, famously observed, “The President is the sole organ of the nation in its external affairs, and its sole representative with foreign nations.… The [executive] department is entrusted with the whole foreign intercourse of the nation.” In 1936, the Supreme Court explicitly acknowledged in its Curtiss-Wright Export decision, the “delicate, plenary and exclusive power of the President as the sole organ of the federal government in the field of international relations[.]”
I agree with McCarthy that this is about teaching and not prosecuting; why prosecute politics? This is a very "teachable" moment but moments are fleeting.
Sunday, April 08, 2007
Another English Speaking Peoples' Nugget
"'While this ugly and irritating business of the [First World] War Debt remains in suspense it is a real barrier to Anglo-American friendship,' wrote Churchill in May 1938 [emph. added], yet the debt and its interest was not finally paid off until the end of the year 2005 [emph. added]. The United States is rarely commended for her patience over this; but deserves to be."
Quite the understatement by Master Roberts.
Quite the understatement by Master Roberts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
