Sometimes, Dear Gentle Reader(s), it’s so easy, that one thinks an effort is hardly worthwhile.
Case in point—over at the Townhalldotcom Muckroom, Bill O’Reilly’s column starts with this titbit: “In fact, we are becoming a nation of braying sheep…”
Ah, Bill-o—to use the Hallowed Keith’s word—, sheep, my boyo, don’t bray, they bleat. Jackasses bray.
Either way, though, Bill-o’s covered.
Happy Fourth, America. Remember the troops.
Sphere: Related ContentInteresting take on the Iranian protests, Dear Gentle Reader(s), is noted in today’s The Washington Post.
It seems the regimes of China, Cuba, and Burma have been trying to keep the news about the Iranians’ protest away from the people of those benighted countries.
Never let it be said that petitioning the government is futile. Sometimes the gain is not immediately observable.
It’s always good to see thugs become nervous.
Sphere: Related ContentToday, Dear Gentle Reader(s), let us salute a man with a sense of humor, and a sly one at that.
Our hero’s name is Daniel Politi, and he writes a summary of leading newspapers’ front pages for Slate Magazine. His wit is on view with today’s* subject line: “Iran's Guardian Council: Election Was Kosher.”
It’s like the first sip of a very cold, very dry Bombay martini, eh wot?
To Daniel Politi—today’s funniest person in the worrrrrrld!
*Posted Tuesday, June 23, 2009, at 6:33 AM ET
Sphere: Related ContentTransparency, Dear Gentle Reader(s), is the catch word du jour, so one must strive for as much of it as possible.
As a follow up to yesterday’s post encouraging you to visit Andrew Sullivan’s The Daily Dish, today there’s encouragement for you to visit The New Republic’s online site to read Marty Peretz’s take on the Iranian elections.
Peretz holds that the elections were, indeed, valid because of the widespread support of the vast numbers of poor people out in the smaller towns and villages. (Interesting to note that Hugo Chavez’s government was one of the first to congratulate Ahmadinejad. Poverty has a voice which is too often neglected by politicians. Otherwise Hugo would be a footnote rather than whatever he is now.)
Of course, note, too, that Sullivan’s coverage is just short of live—tweeters tweeting and cell phone videos in real time--while the Peretz comment is based on public polling which occurred some two or three weeks ago.
Stay tuned.
Keep reading.
Sphere: Related ContentAndrew Sullivan is doing yeoman’s work publishing reports out of Iran.
Get over to his website, The Daily Dish, for up to the minute tweets.
Yea, Sullivan!
Sphere: Related ContentAlas, Dear Gentle Reader(s), the editors and commentators over at Townhall’s Muckroom are not having a good year.
The racism card isn’t working, the gender card isn’t working, the anti-same sex marriage card is losing its trumping ability. So what’s a desperate pundit to do?
Grab onto the nearest puff of smoke, it seems.
The June 5 Muckroom email has these two entries:
1. Linda Chavez has this lede--“The diversity crowd doesn't really believe in diversity. In fact, what they're really aiming for is conformity of opinion.” This, DGR(s), from a spokesperson from the party which is going through a period of expelling what some call RINOs (Republican In Name Only) from the party. If that isn’t aiming for conformity of opinion, nothing is.
2. Under the title of “MTV’s Shock and Fraud,” Brent Bozell works himself into a lather over the “Bruno-buttock-Eminem” joke. When a representative of MTV says, “That's all anyone wants to talk about, so let's get it out of the way. They rehearsed it at dress and yes, it went as far as it did on the live show then,” Bozell fulminates “Can you believe the chutzpah of MTV, disparaging the media they're shamelessly exploiting, that "all anyone wants to talk about" is that they'd manufacture this new low, this shock-jock-strap plot?”
It is to laugh, then to sigh, then to worry. The paucity of legitimacy of the right has never before been so easily observed. With serious decisions being made and the right wing commentariat floundering, we could be in danger of making mistakes without the vision of all parties concerned with the big picture.
Get serious, Muckroom denizens.
A loyal opposition isn’t worthy if there’s nothing to which one is opposed.
Sphere: Related ContentHere’s a rather intriguing lede, Dear Gentle Reader(s), from George Will’s contribution to Townhall.com: “Epiphanies are a dime a dozen among congressional Democrats as they discover urgent new reasons to experience the almost erotic pleasure of commandeering other people's money.”
One has to wonder, just how can Will make the declarative statement that there is an “almost erotic pleasure” in taking charge of the money paid into the government’s treasury by taxpayers? How does he know there is a near-erotic pleasure to taxing? What sort of foreplay gets ol’ George going?
Maybe it’s a case of wishful projection? (“I love money! I loooovvvve money! Gimme!!! Oooh. Ahhhh. Ummm…”)
Sphere: Related ContentThere is, Dear Gentle Reader(s), a full page ad in today’s The Desert Sun* (Palm Springs/Coachella Valley) which gives credit to Representative Mary Bono for her vote in favor of the recently passed energy plan.
It’s a wonder of circumspection in part, and in something else in small part.
“Leading businesses and moderate conservation groups” is the lead phrasing. The catch word there is “moderate.” No tree huggers, folks. Circumspection.
The second para begins with “Despite enormous pressure to toe the Washington line…” Key word—Washington. The pressure didn’t come from Washington. Whatever that is. It came from the Republican party. Something else. Fudging?
Bono-Mack (her married name) voted outside of the Republican caucus. The ad nimbly sidesteps that fact. This is, after all, a bastion of Republican thinking (Prop Hate, er, 8 passed easily in the area).
Republican pressure becomes Washington pressure. OK. That’s doable.
*May 30, 2009, A14
Sphere: Related ContentOf all the claims which the pro-Prop 8 folks present, Dear Gentle Reader(s), is one made by Andrew Pugno a spokesperson for Protectmarriage.com. Speaking on Public Radio’s Air Talk on May 27, 2009, he said this, “Marriage predates government.”
Really? Any proof of that? Certainly not in any anthropological study can that statement be substantiated.
It went something like this (OK, my conjecture, but it certainly makes more sense than his): First came mating; Second came family—with someone making decisions (and that process could have been shared); Third came tribe—with someone making decisions for several families—one of which was controlling the mating processes); Fourth came some dissatisfaction with decisions which went against some common practices (Whadda mean, we can’t eat pork?); Fifth came superstition to use as a tool against the dissatisfaction (Because It told me to tell you not to do that); Sixth came the refinement of superstition into religion.
Perhaps a bit fanciful, but that’s the lineage according to the anthropological studies of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Government, rudimentary, to be sure, existed prior to marriage because until government came into existence, what we call marriage today was coupling for the purpose of propagating the species. Cultural differences between tribes came later, but “government” arose out of need to protect the tribe.
For certain, “Marriage predates government,” stated with such certainty by Pugno, is at best a virtual fib.
Sphere: Related ContentAh, Dear Gentle Reader(s), sometimes they make it so easy.
Take, for instance, today’s Townhalldotcom muckroom. There’s a piece by Linda Chavez titled “When in Doubt, Blame Bush.” It contains this softball, “you have to wonder what [President Obama] would do without George W. Bush to kick around.”
Um…
Nope. Not really.
Perhaps eal with the economy? Health care? Greening power? Securing Afghanistan? Modernizing Islam? Third World poverty? Inner city poverty?
How many more examples would you think Chavez needs?
Sphere: Related ContentDoes one suppose, Dear Gentle Reader(s), that the seller of this car learned to write cost numbers somewhere other than here in the U.S.?
IN case it seems fuzzy, that is a period after the 1.
What fun!
Sphere: Related Content
George Pelecanos, Dear Gentle Reader(s), is the newest “old” writer of note to cross this desk. One down, one in progress, a few to go. The reason for this post isn’t George so much as his editor and some other editor of years past which let the –of pass as indicator of character instead of insisting on ‘ve.
The writer, naturally, tries for some sort of verisimilitude while writing dialogue. Even the perfect sentences of Jane Austen take on “color” when delivering language of certain characters.
The use of could of, however, is suspect as a genuine replication of non-standard articulation. The f and the v are both fricatives. They are produced by passing air between the upper front teeth and the bottom lip, the difference is that the v uses a sound from the larynx along with the friction of air.
Thus, the author who uses could of might as well be using could’ve. The resulting sound is exactly the same—of has the pronunciation of ‘ve no matter the education of the speaker. The more precise effect of character indication would be achieved, if articulation is to be used as an indication of character, by the use of coulda—or its almost as popular variation—could-a.
In Pelecano’s case, the editor of The Big Blowdown allowed, on page 289, a “could of" in mid-page and then, a couple of (coupla?) lines down, a “could’ve.” Hedging a bet? Indifference? Not paying attention to speech patterns?
Somebody got paid nice bucks to edit the book, not to mention the author’s royalty. That’s good money in exchange for…what? This error cannot be let pass unchallenged. Therefore, aspiring authors and editors, be warned: The “ve” patrol is on alert.
(OK, so this is a nit. In these times, though, focusing on a nit or two is a valuable tool in averting meltdown.)
Sphere: Related ContentThoreau’s confinement in a New England jail resulted in a nice little epigram—the body might be jailed, but thought, once uttered, cannot be recalled or squelched.
Which brings us, torturously, to the current debate, Dear Gentle Reader(s), of the Matthew Shepard Act, which purports to punish certain acts as “hate crimes.” It is surely foolish to try to criminalize hate, but that really isn’t the primary purpose of hate crimes legislation, is it?
What such legislation does is to foster a discussion about the genesis of hate, at least as regards certain social situations. How long has it been since there was a white on black killing where the perpetrator escaped justice? Or since the perpetrator was able to claim a “Twinkie defense?” Or a homosexual panic defense?
The more we speak of gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, the more light is shone on these topics, and the less it is possible for bias to develop into a murderous rage.
What we need is more thought, and more people willing to speak their thoughts. At some point in the near future the hate crime laws will be erased from the books. That erasure is another “consummation devoutly to be wished.”
Sphere: Related ContentIf, Dear Gentle Reader(s), you are one of those who is divided about whether or not the justice system of The United States should initiate and pursue possible war crimes of some previous administration personnel, then hie thee to Paul Krugman’s piece in today’s The New York Times. It should go a long way toward helping your make up your mind.
Krugman falls definitely on the side of justice moving forward.
…America is more than a collection of policies. We are, or at least we used to be, a nation of moral ideals. In the past, our government has sometimes done an imperfect job of upholding those ideals. But never before have our leaders so utterly betrayed everything our nation stands for. “This government does not torture people,” declared former President Bush, but it did, and all the world knows it.
In the name of our “moral ideals,” the investigation of the previous administration’s activities must be allowed to go forward. We owe it to ourselves, to our history, and to our future.
Sphere: Related ContentOh my, Dear Gentle Reader(s), it seems those embarrassing moments of “in-the-know” from one’s youth which result in red-faced giggles never really fade into oblivion.
Take, for instance, the current reich-wing spate of “tea parties” being held to protest taxing plans of the Obama administration.
Add a smidgen of…(ahem)…”adult” entertainment information, namely the use of “tea bag” as a metaphor for…(ahem #2)…scrotum.
Then mix with a headline from the Townhall(dot)com email advertisement which reads “Your Tea Bag Might Be on TV April 15th!” and you have a very successful recipe for an episode of smirks, titters, and tee-hees. “Really?!!? Will there be tea baggers and tea bagging? On TV? Whee! We’ve come a long way, baby!”
Thanks, Townhalldotcom. I needed that fun fitlet.
*Set your imagination loose.
Sphere: Related ContentThe TV show, Dear Gentle Reader(s), is Southland on NBC. The scene is between two police cars, one a cruiser on patrol, the other a vice squad sedan. There’s a man sitting in the back of the vice car. A disbelieving cop in the cruiser is saying, “There’re signs every two feet;” the LAPD has a park under surveillance. How could a guy get arrested? There are signs and warnings all over the place. But there sits the unhappy fellow.
The penultimate scene is in a bar, and the fellow in the cruiser is saying, “I had a shitty day. I got arrested.” Unnoticed a few feet away, the cop who couldn’t believe someone would be stupid enough to get arrested in a park which was known to be patrolled by LAPD says, “I had a shitty day, too.” (It was a tough patrol.)
No mention of the fellow from the park’s infringement, just a reference to the arrest. No particular overt signs in the bar, but you’d have to be blind, DGR(s), not to know that the officer and the fellow from the park have something in common.
“We are everywhere” is a slogan du decade (or more). Is it such a truism that there’s no longer any need to “spell out” the officer’s dating habits? Or is NBC a participant in the “great conspiracy,” the “great agenda,” about which the fundies keep bleating?
Stay tuned.
Sphere: Related ContentIt might not last long, Dear Gentle Reader(s), so you’d best hie thee over to The New York Times’ presentation of Maureen Dowd’s paean to President Obama in today’s Op-Ed section.
Dowd has made a 180 degree turn since the days of Obambi. Doubtless she will eventually steer a more centrist course, Mr. Obama can’t help but stumble in her eyes at some point, but right now it’s “killer smile” time—that European trip has turned into a seductive coup.
Celebrate with me.
Sphere: Related ContentA couple of years ago, a brother sent me a wonderful Christmas gift: he’d made a contribution to the group which buys milk cows for distribution to the poor in poverty stricken areas of the world.
This year a teaching colleague of mine gave me a wonderful birthday gift: she’d made a contribution to Doctors Without Borders which will provide 250 people with antibiotics to fight bacterial infections.
Not to belittle gift-giving on special occasions, but isn’t there a time when we, as adults, would really profit more from donations to worthy charities than we would from candy or flowers or…?
Thinking good thoughts and helping the less fortunate are wonderful ways to celebrate a memorable moment.
Sphere: Related ContentI lost a duffel bag in a dream.
What happens to an object lost in a dream?
Elizabeth Bishop’s lost city or keys
Are somewhere, really.
But that love she might one day have lost—
Where is that?
And a duffel in a dream—
Where is that?
How does one find such?
Where to look?
Sphere: Related ContentGetting closer, Dear Gentle Reader(s), to that stage.
While walking this morning, and having my usual internal review of yesterday's discussions, I noticed a certain amount of arm movement which didn't comport with the usual swing associated with a good walking pace.
What distracted me from my musing was my right hand, fisted, assailing the space directly in front of me.
What?!?
Hmmm...I'd been remembering a strong point I'd made...perhaps I was adding a little physical emphasis to the words?
OMG!
Have I become one of those seniors walking the neighborhood muttering and gesticulating?
I dunno. Maybe.
When dogs start barking and children throwing rocks, I'll stay home.
Senior Moment
Aging
For the first time ever, it’s being touted, Dear Gentle Reader(s), that a sitting president will be making an appearance on a late-night television program.
President Obama visits with Jay Leno tonight and makes history. Why this is the first time for such an appearance somewhat begs credulity.
One becomes so accustomed to seeing a sitting president on The News Hour, Mr. Obama just last week, and on the Sunday talk shows on occasion, that it beggars the mind to discover no one has visited with either Letterman or Leno, not to mention going back to Mr. Paar or Mr. J.Fred Muggs.
Visiting with the late-night crowd seems such a sure-fire way to gain some public empathy. Mr. Nixon might have been a bit of a cold fish, but chatting with Mr. Carson might’ve helped gain a little sympathy. And if Mr. Clinton had gone on Letterman, we might’ve had a better shot at getting health care through the Congress in 1994—Harry and Louise (and the AARP) aside.
Finally, the boob tube is being used to a significant degree as a teaching tool.
This is a first from which we will all gain.
Sphere: Related ContentThere’s a danger, Dear Gentle Reader(s), in using mnemonics for math problems, especially the advanced mathematics required for affixing the proper amount of tip to a restaurant bill.
For years here in California, it was easy to tip the customary 15%. The state sales tax was 7 1/2%, so one only had to double the tax to be home free.
Then the tip rose to a new custom—20%. Well, that’s OK, too. One simply has to double the first single digit of a bill under $100, or double the first two digits of a bill under $1000. (One doesn’t entertain the thought of a bill over $1000, does one? Not this one.)
Recently a problem arose with the combination of the partial mnemonic double the and gin (Bombay martini—not Sapphire) followed by wine (house red) at dinner. The thought process went something like this:
Let’s see. The bill is $98.00. Double the 9 for $18. What? Um, no. I don’t need a doggie bag. Where was I? Tip. Let’s see. $18 doubled is $36. Easy. Tote it up. Sign it. There. Ready to go.
Something dawned the next morning. (let’s see…four fingers minus three toes plus one nostril…hmmm…uh-oh!)
Let that be a lesson to me, DGR(s).
Pass the bill to someone else.
Sphere: Related ContentIsn’t it a bit perplexing, Dear Gentle Reader(s), to read the story following the headline in today’s The New York Times? After all, “A.I.G. Planning Huge Bonuses After $170 Billion Bailout” isn’t exactly what one would expect for a lede in these dire financial times.
Yet, there it is in all the spectacular tone deafness of one Edward M. Liddy, appointed by the government to run the company.
For wonderment try this for the wrong word:
Liddy wrote, “We cannot attract and retain the best and the brightest talent to lead and staff the A.I.G. businesses — which are now being operated principally on behalf of American taxpayers — if employees believe their compensation is subject to continued and arbitrary adjustment by the U.S. Treasury.”
What, one ponders, might constitute “the best and the brightest talent.” What makes the bonuses even more problematic is this paragraph:
The bonuses will be paid to executives at A.I.G.’s financial products division, the unit that wrote trillions of dollars’ worth of credit-default swaps that protected investors from defaults on bonds backed in many cases by subprime mortgages.
In other words, DGR(s), the “best and brightest” which Liddy wishes to reward and retain are those who got us into this mess in the first place.
Then, too, there was a negotiation which resulted in some of these bonuses being paid, and that negotiation cripples the effort to reduce, much less withdraw, the bonuses.
It’s almost as though the best and brightest are the lawyers who did the negotiations for the alleged best and brightest of A.I.G.’s financial products division.
Contracted bonuses which have to be given to people who made the wrong decision.
God bless America. (And God give Mr. Liddy a better ear for language.)
Sphere: Related ContentAlas, Dear Gentle Reader(s), there is confusion in the air over at The New York Times.
Today’s issue of the NYTimes features an opinion article written by the witty Maureen Dowd titled “Should Michelle Cover Up?” and subtitled in the online email teaser, “Let's face it: The only bracing symbol of American strength right now is the image of Michelle Obama's sculpted biceps.”
Snark? The combined email info blended into the reputation of Dowd for eviscerating the foibles of the political class could lead a reader to think, indeed, “Snap!”—if not “Snark!”
Ah, but then, DGR(s), reading the piece clarifies, perhaps, Dowd’s intent. She quotes colleague David Brooks, ““She’s made her point. Now she should put away Thunder and Lightning.” (Brooks named her bicepts?!?) And she re-tells of a Republican’s comment about Ms Obama’s dress at the recent speech to Congress, “Babe.”
Finally, Dowd further quotes Brooks, “Washington is sensually avoidant. The wonks here like brains. She should not be known for her physical presence, for one body part.” Sometimes I think half the reason Obama ran for president is so Michelle would have a platform to show off her biceps.”
My. Bicepts are “sensual.” And the inspirational presidency was spawned by a desire to show off those lusty bicepts. Who knew? (This information makes The Mikado’s erotic elbow seem tame.)
The question to ponder is whether Dowd was being snarky towards Ms Obama or to Mr Brooks. Her sensuality or his ungracious, though private—Dowd and Brooks were sharing a taxi at the time—thoughts.
Perhaps the answer could be found in the final lines of Dowd’s column:
Michelle has soared every day, expanding the job to show us what can be accomplished by a generous spirit, a confident nature and a well-disciplined body.
I also have no doubt she can talk cap-and-trade with ease and panache.
Hmmm. Ball’s in your court, Davie boy. (But you might start by not trusting a columnist who has a penchant for sharp wit.)
Sphere: Related ContentThere is, Dear Gentle Reader(s), in The New York Times today, a wonderful example of how, when need runs up against religious mythology, logic and clarity get lost in the conflict.
In an article about the success of a bank in Michigan to serve Moslem customers, appears this paragraph:
To distill and simplify some complicated theological and financial concepts, the basis of Islamic finance is Shariah’s forbidding of “riba,” which can be variously translated as usury or interest. Mortgage alternatives, which are the most popular financial product for Islamic consumers in the United States, essentially add what would have been the monthly interest into the purchase price of a home.
So, essentially, in order to “comply” with the stricture against usury/interest, the bank’s president needed
On the religious side…to appoint a board of Shariah scholars to certify the mortgage alternatives as “halal,” or religiously permissible. On the secular flank, he put months into persuading both state banking officials and his own board of the new products’ legitimacy.
The “interest” doesn’t appear, one must conclude, in the monthly statement, but it exists in the payment. As long as it isn’t called interest, it isn’t interest—except it is—and it’s OK to make the payment.
One looks askance.
If mere humans aren’t fooled by this word-legerdemain, how much doubt can there be that an all-knowing Being would be fooled?
Alas. Logic? Clarity? Victims of theology.
Sphere: Related ContentHere, Dear Gentle Reader(s), is a little mental health break:
it is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it
Just a little extrapolation and we have the rationale behind the past 28 years of middle class support for the Republican Party’s trickle up financial strategy.
Sphere: Related ContentNo, Dear Gentle Reader(s), this is not a tale from the Bible. Unless, of course, you might be an avid fan of the Los Angeles Times.
Test your credulity with this lead-in:
Ruth Madoff, wife of accused Ponzi scheme operator Bernie Madoff, is trying to persuade a judge that more than $62 million of her assets are "unrelated" to her husband's alleged $50-billion fraud.
How’d you do?
Yeah. I, also. Especially when one remembers that ruth means, compassion for the misery of someone else, and remorse.
Sure.
Lotsa ruth in this story.
Sphere: Related ContentRemember the snarkiness, Dear Gentle Reader(s), of the recent election cycle? If you want a reminder, simply zip over to the Townhall muckroom. Snarky is de rigueur, but occasionally someone slips up and writes a pithy headline.
Today the headline for Paul Jacob’s column is worth contemplating. Remember the Maginot -- or, don't shoot the dog is worth remembering and applying to just about every situation in life. The Maginot Line was supposed to prevent a German invasion into France. It stretched all along the French-German border. It might’ve worked, but we’ll never know. German troops invaded France through Belgium. They went around the northern end of the Line. (For an interesting step into the history of the Maginot Line, go here, DGR(s).)
The lesson of the Maginot Line is not to let a single factor act as a barrier against a perceived threat. And the lesson of Jacob’s title is we all have to have some sort of barking dog to alert us to danger. Constant vigilance is necessary.
Of course the Muckroom doesn’t stray too far from its chosen path of snark. There’s always some bit of inanity to counter the wisdom. Kevin McCullough’s column carries the title Obama as Hitler.
What a nice, thoughtful bunch. On occasion.
Sphere: Related ContentToday, Dear Gentle Reader(s), on KCRW’s “Left, Right & Center,” Tony Blankley held forth that arguing ad hominem meant “…using humans rather than ideas…” (At 11:37)
Really?
I thought it meant arguing against the person’s character rather than the person’s contention. Since none of the other panelists corrected him, one wonders. (Of course, there might be the possibility the other panelists didn’t want to embarrass Blankley. After all, he did work for Gingrich, and does work for the Moonie newspaper, Washington Times. Why embarrass him any further, eh?)
Have a nit or two?
Sphere: Related ContentThere are a couple of physical side effects, Dear Gentle Reader(s), of Brachytherapy, which are rather indelicate, and which will not be addressed here.
A psychological side effect, among which there might be many, but hard to recognize in the general give and take of daily living in the human psyche, manifested itself last night in a dream.
The side effect manifested itself thus: The dreamer is reading a letter to an advice column which included the fact that the letter writer was having trouble “sustaining genitalia.”
Now the libido of the brachytherapy patient is adversely affected by 1) radiation seeds killing off the bad, as well, presumably, some good, cells; 2) Flowmax and Finasteride contribute to this libidinous deterioration because of a particular major physical side effect.
What a surprise to discover that the sub consciousness is affected to the degree that diction—choice of word—is also thrown into some disarray.
After all, how can one not sustain genitalia? Even if you lop it off or plug it up, it’s there. Isn’t it? At least in the genetic make-up?
Such ponderous thoughts which visit in the wee hours of the morning.
Sphere: Related ContentWay back when, Dear Gentle Reader(s), U.S. taxpayers were allowed to deduct some of the interest on our credit card debt from our Federal taxes.
Once many of us discovered that deduction had been repealed, we began to pay off the charges monthly. Some of us haven’t paid more than five or ten dollars in interest on those debts since.
Perhaps we might be able to see our way to running up a credit card bill a couple of times a year if we were once again able to deduct at least part of the interest charges. That might assist in stopping the downward spiral of sales in the U.S.
Or not.
Just sayin’.
Sphere: Related ContentOne year anniversary of the procedure. Cooking on simmer and fading. Changed from flomax to finasteride. Libido 99% gone.
So far so good. Still breathing.
Sphere: Related ContentDoubtless, Dear Gentle Reader(s), we are of a similar political bent. That being established, you might wonder why there is so much of a political nature here. Perhaps it’s because there’s a hope that a comment or a phrase will enlighten or might be useful in a discussion with someone who holds a differing view.
Ergo:
It’s a wonder that some people who are opposed to the current stimulus/spending bills currently under discussion in Washington, D.C., keep repeating phrases like, “This program doesn’t stimulate,” especially when discussing educational stimuli.
Spending stimulates. Of course it does. When education funding is increased the money flows into the economy in many ways—teachers’ salaries, aides’ salaries, increased supplies, which gives us more--much more spending.
For instance, just consider the number of workers it takes to get a single Ticonderoga pencil into the hands of a 3rd grader: The miner who retrieved the mineral (not to mention the prospector who found the lode), the truck driver who drive the graphite to the factory, the woodsman who harvested the tree; the electrician who strung the power wire to the factory, the factory worker who ran the machine which crimped the metal which holds the rubber eraser, the box manufacturer who produced the container in which the pencils were shipped (more truckers) to the warehouse (forklift operator), and you get the drift.
If money is put into a tangible product, there is spending.
Tax cuts may or may not end up “spent.” Much of it goes into savings, which eventually will go into the production economy, but not as quickly as will money spent on tangibles.
Sometimes the opponents of the President’s plan just don’t exhibit an encompassing view.
You, DGR(s), on the other hand, are enlightened. Go forth. Spread the good word.
Sphere: Related ContentDear Gentle Reader(s), this posting probably wouldn’t be happening without the courage supplied by a salty dog.
The Phelps bong picture brouhaha is silly.
Smoking marijuana is a rite of passage observed by many and disregarded by many.
One thing for sure, it is a font for hypocrisy. The marijuana laws are silly and totally ineffective except for an excuse to jail some troublemakers.
Smoking marijuana is not a “gateway” to harsher drugs except for, possibly, people who are predisposed to harsher drugs anyway.
My experience with marijuana was that it made me far more cautious, and it slowed my reflexes down. If driving, I’d stop for a stop sign a half block before I reached the corner. I drove at 1/2 the speed limit. I giggled a lot. I had severe happenings of Attention Deficit Disorder—in the middle of passionate “making out,” I’d turn aside and snooze for a few minutes. I ate cookies as if there were no tomorrow.
I grew out of the phase.
Peace.
Wow.
Yea, NOML!
(See what alcohol does to your logic?)
Sphere: Related ContentThe New York Times reports this afternoon that Time Warner Cable announced it “lost $8.2 billion in the fourth quarter and would lay off 1,200 people.”
Maybe.
But, Dear Gentle Reader(s), TWC charges a lot of money for its services. I have the stripped down digital card version (NO HBO, etc.), and my bill is $66.06.
Remember those stories of creative accounting used in movie studios?
Just musin’.
Sphere: Related ContentHere’s another bit of evidence in the B-16 (the Prada Pope) file for you, Dear Gentle Reader(s). It comes from today’s print edition of the Los Angeles Times.
VATICAN CITY
New bishop tied Katrina to sin
An Austrian pastor who has been quoted as saying Hurricane Katrina was God's punishment for sin in New Orleans is being promoted to the rank of bishop.
The Vatican announced that Pope Benedict XVI had tapped the Rev. Gerhard Wagner, 54, to be auxiliary bishop in Linz, Austria. It did not mention the reported remarks about Katrina.
And it was just last week that Benny re-instated an excommunicated bishop who is a Holocaust denier. What a guy.
John XXIII is twirling in his grave; Andrew Sullivan has one more obstacle to hurdle (he refuses to join the ranks of recovering Catholics).
Sphere: Related ContentAh, Dear Gentle Reader(s), the joy of politics lies in the small print.
Today the Los Angeles Times gives us a little more insight into the “class warfare” which the Republican Party so often bewails.
It’s a classic case of misdirection. The class war is over, and you and I, DGR(s) have lost.
This last week the Republicans in the House of Representatives voted, each and every one of them, for more tax cuts.
That insight in the LAT is this:
The average tax rate paid by the richest 400 Americans fell by a third to 17.2% through the first six years of the Bush administration, and their average income doubled to $263.3 million, new data show.
Was your tax rate reduced by 1/3 and did your income double during the first six years of the Bush administration?
Thought not.
Welcome to awareness, fellow losers in the class war.
The Republican Party is not so interested in preventing a redistribution of wealth as long as that redistribution is trickle up.
Alas.
Sphere: Related ContentHere’s a quote from a recent posting by Andrew Sullivan:
What the defenders of the Flying Spaghetti Monster thesis' commensurability with actual theism fail to recognize is that belief in God generally doesn't have anything so "concrete" as its substance. It's not the particulars of God -- the "invisible man in the sky" imagery and such -- that matter. In some sense these particulars aren't the content of theist belief at all; it's the "consequences" of God -- moral compunction, cultural taboo, social phenomena that amount to a de facto eschatology, etc. -- that actually constitute theism. And when measured by adherence to behaviors consistent with this belief, atheism suddenly appears much rarer.
And that, Dear Gentle Reader(s), is what I’ve been trying to formulate into words both respectful and logical. The “particulars” of the monotheist religions of the desert are truly irrelevant. What is important is the social contract, the “consequences.” “Do unto others” is far more important than a virgin birth or a resurrection or a single anthropomorphic deity.
When that basic reality becomes dominant in religious thought and seminaries, the world will be better off.
Unfortunately, researching the answer to a religious cui bono indicates that the power/money behind the current religious thinking will not cede anything to logic or the betterment of the planet’s occupants.
There’s one current theological dictum with which all can agree: Man cannot grasp the reality of the godhead. And since that reality extends far beyond an anthropomorphic supreme being, we’re all agnostics. We simply don’t know because we can’t know.
Sphere: Related ContentPoor Pope Benedict—he simply can’t win for losing.
Benedict XVI, (B-16), welcomes back into the fold of the Roman Catholic bishoparchy an outspoken Holocaust denier then says he doesn’t agree with the guy’s anti-Semitism. Sounds like a version of “hate the sin, love the sinner.”
Pope John XXIII convened Vatican II which was designed to “modernize” the Catholic Church; B-16 seems determined to roll back VatII as much as possible.
B-16’s actions speak louder than his words.
One wonders if the Prada Pope will be welcomed by John in the Conclave in the Sky.
Sphere: Related ContentWith apologies to John Huston, Dear Gentle Reader(s), one moans the use of spell check in the absence of editors who are a bit more sentient than an application.
Here is a quote from today’s The Desert Sun obituary page. It seems a man who recently died also recently, in 2007, “marred” the woman who became his widow.
One doubts she would agree.
A spell check program is less expensive than a live editor or at least a proof reader, but the trade off is of dubious value.
Sphere: Related Content
One has to be amused, Dear Gentle Reader(s), at the inadvertent humor contained in some email subject lines which grace the Junk box.
“grtou, keep your youthful look”
Um…Keep it?
Please.
Sphere: Related Content1) It’s 86 degrees here in Palm Springs right now. Top’s down.
2) Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is on the way out. It’s about time.
3) No on 8 court case is going forward with substantial additional help from major unions.
4) To prosecute or not to prosecute the torture clique is ahead of its time. Investigate first then, if warranted, prosecute.
5) Obama’s dinner w/conservative pundits was a good move on his part.
6) Big Bang Theory is the absolute funniest program on the tube this season.
7) Two and a Half Men can hardly get any raunchier without full frontal nudity.
8) CCH Pounder is underappreciated.
Sphere: Related ContentThat, Dear Gentle Reader(s), is the title of the final story in Allie Proulx’s recently released collection of short stories. They all deal, natch, with Wyoming.
It’s a tough read.
One wonders how citizens of that “Great State of” feel about Ms Proulx and her writing.
Recently Proulx made some minor headlines by announcing that she intended to leave Wyoming.
Read these stories, DGR(s), and let me know whether they are an homage to the people of the state or a…um…middle finger salute. (You might also read the linked story for further insight.)
Sphere: Related ContentAmongst all of the brouhaha, Dear Gentle Reader(s), surrounding the passage of Proposition 8 here in California, is an oft-repeated conflation of some scientific and Biblical concepts.
The most often used is, of course, the female-male element of procreation. It is a scientific fact, with some few androgynous exceptions, as well as the old “male female He created them.”
Biblical fundamentalists, especially those who claim to believe in biblical inerrancy, use this biblical reference as their principal argument against allowing committed same-gender couples to call their union “marriage.” “God made it that way.”
While it is true that “God made it that way,” is it not strange that fundies ignore the studies of nature/God which indicate that procreation is not a rampant element of life on earth; rather it is, in most cases, rigidly controlled.
Why is it that carnivores have limited birth rates? Why is it that small herbivores and insectivores have larger litters? Why do insects and smaller fishes have such large numbers of offspring?
Generally speaking, the large populations of smaller life forms feed the larger life forms. Without the small rodent food supply of the Arctic, many wolves and certain birds of that region would perish. Population control is a form of natural birth control. Nature has put in place a very stern limit on wildlife carnivores—should they exceed that limit, starvation to the point of possible extinction is a certainty.
If one might “jump to the chase,” DGR(s), it is strange that fundies opposed to same-gender “marriage” don’t see there is a logical thread between the natural order of population control amongst wildlife species and the population control of same-gender coupling. And that coupling could very well be part of the larger plan to help control the human population of the earth—which is certainly better than war, disease, famine, and female infanticide.
Just because the desert tribes of 4,000 years ago were concerned with ethnic cleansing, if not genocide, does not mean that we ought to take their dicta as literal law of our own. We have the ability of 4,000 years of observation and learning. That should give us perspective which those desert tribes would not have been capable of achieving. Same-gender unions are generally non-reproductive, although they are certainly a stabilizing force in the society; and, as such they are a God given element of population control—and a much better one than war, famine, disease, and female infanticide.
To assert, as does a writer to the local Palm Springs newspaper:
Mistletoe, can only grow in/on trees.
It cannot grow in the earth.
Only in/on trees, Oak Trees.
Hearts of oak are our ships, and our hearts.
If mistletoe did not attach to oak trees it would cease to exist.
Oak trees, (men) mistletoe (women).
Mistletoe attaches to oak trees to survive, it cannot attach it self to other mistletoe, that is the order of things, nature's order.
Simple isn't it.
is erroneous. Nothing in nature is simple.
Here’s loving response to fundies’ outrage, Dear Gentle Reader(s), “Same-gender marriage is a blessing from God.”
Sphere: Related ContentPalm Springs is all palm trees and xeriscape, this is a scene from last week’s snow fall.
Have a good Bah!Humbug! season, Dear Gentle Reader(s)!
Sphere: Related ContentOver at The New York Times’ email submission today, Dear Gentle Reader(s), there’s a slightly amusing teaser sentence: “Talk radio hosts are back on offense, with some familiar names joining the airwaves as Barack Obama takes office.” (The phrasing in the article itself--After eight years of playing defense for President Bush, the conservatives who dominate talk radio are back on offense--isn’t as much fun.)
Haven’t they always been offensive? Isn’t that their purpose? Why God put them on earth? Rather like houseflies or cockroaches?
Who knew?
Sphere: Related ContentPoor Andrew Sullivan, he just can’t let go the bile his system holds for Senator Clinton.
Here’s Sullivan’s latest silliness as it appears in a discussion about Ms Kennedy’s interest in the New York senate seat which Mrs. Clinton will be vacating upon her move to the State Department: “Clinton got her seat because of nepotism…”
Now, Dear Gentle Reader(s), well you might wonder about that. Sullivan got it wrong. Mrs. Clinton ran in the Democratic primaries; she ran against a Republican who tried mightily to run on resentment of the Clintons. Mr. Lazio’s tactic didn’t work. Mrs. Clinton worked hard on her campaign and won the race in 2000 handily.
That is not called nepotism; it’s called hard work.
Mrs. Clinton had name recognition, but that could well have hurt as much as it helped. Sullivan owes the Senator an apology, but there is serious doubt it will be forthcoming.
As to whether or not Ms Kennedy (Why isn’t anyone using her married name? Did Mary Bono-Mack start something? Or maybe Diane Feinstein?) should be appointed to the seat, it’s probably best to take Mr. Butler’s stance. Remember, DGR(s)? It starts, “Frankly, my dear…”
Sphere: Related Content
Um, Dear Gentle Reader(s), the above is not quite truthful.
It was spoken by Margie Christofersen about gays to Steve Lopez who wrote “Prop.8 stance upends her life” (print)/”A life thrown into turmoil by $100 donation for Prop. 8” (online).
It isn’t true, you see, because Margie Cristofersen also “…supports her church’s position [LDS] that marriage is between a man and a woman.
That support indicates that Christofersen doesn’t think gays are part of “everybody else.” Committed relationships between two consenting adults are not equal in Christofersen’s view. She merely mouths a platitude and seemingly doesn’t understand why she isn’t believed. She thinks she loves equally, but she doesn’t. Even the copious tears reported by Lopez are unconvincing.
Actions, Dear Margie, speak clearer truth than words.
It’s only logical.
Sphere: Related ContentOn occasion, Dear Gentle Reader(s), a thought comes to light which virtually defies description in the limited space available in a “title.”
One such thought appeared in The Desert Sun, the local paper in Palm Springs, in a letter to the editor on December 11, 2008:
A man and woman are equal partners, but different and complimentary in so many ways. That is why Adam was pleased with God's gift of Eve. Only the combination of man and woman can produce children and hence the continuation of a society.
Might one extrapolate? “…Adam was pleased with God’s gift of Eve.” Um…What? God “gave” Eve to Adam? Eve was a gift? Did anyone ask Eve if this was OK with her? God gives gifts? Is there a receipt for possible exchange?
The letter writer lives in Indian Wells, a quite wealthy community in the heart of the Coachella Valley. It is the home of the tennis tournament which brings thousands to Southern California. It once tried to foist its low-income housing requirements onto a neighboring city. One might think, then, that the writer is not completely a sheep, blindly following a religious tenet.
So. What to think? How might one write a headline which encompasses a person’s insensitivity, ignorance, audacity, virtual blasphemy, and courage to face his female spouse as well as another’s astonishment that such a thought would be uttered in the first decade of the 21st century?
Suggestions are welcome.
Sphere: Related ContentThe Vietnam War, Dear Gentle Reader(s), has left an indelible mark, hasn’t it?
Remember the brouhaha over William Ayers, the erstwhile Underground Weatherman which the Republican campaign tried mightily to associate with Mr. Obama?
Well, today in The New York Times he offers a sort of mea culpa. If you have the time and inclination, the column is accessible here.
Expect to see the Republican bloviators to respond with found and fury along these lines of one Hilzoy, in his blog Obsidian Wings. After going back in history (one year prior to Ayers’ start in his column) and fairly well rebutting some of Ayers’ points, Hilzoy ends with this:
Ayers may think that there's still a debate about the Weather Underground's effectiveness. And he might also think that he "acted appropriately in the context of those times." To me, though, he's just a shallow rich kid who took himself and his revolutionary rhetoric much too seriously, helped inspire people to do things that got them killed, and helped to discredit the anti-war movement and the left as a whole.
He has done enough harm already. Now he should do the decent thing and leave us in peace.
That’s good advice. One problem with the advice is that Ayers has been trying to leave everyone in peace, especially himself since those days of stupidity. It was the opposition to Mr. Obama which resurrected Ayers and his wife, Bernadette Dohrn.
And from the tone if Hilzoy’s retort, it’s obvious that there’s no such thing as leaving someone in peace. Ayers’ subsequent laudable behavior does not seem to have counted for anything among the right wing. They could take a lesson from G.B. Shaw who wrote:
The only man I know who behaves sensibly is my tailor; he takes my measurements anew each time he sees me. The rest go on with their old measurements and expect me to fit them.
Redemption?
Piffle! Not for those who took to the streets against the Vietnam War.
Do you ever suppose, DGR(s), that we’ll learn to take “measurements anew” anytime soon?
Sphere: Related ContentA most recent teapot tempest, Dear Gentle Reader(s), has arisen over the different (?) treatment given by Congress to the Wall Street financiers and to the automobile CEOs and union bosses.
When it is pointed out that the financiers were treated with respect and the CEOs are being treated with some derision (You had the audacity to fly!?!), Republican types are immediately crying “Class warfare!”
Um…in case no one has noticed, the class war is over, and the rich folk have won. President Bush has presided over the largest transfer of wealth from the middle class to the upper class in the history of the world.
Don’t believe me? Look around. How many rich folk are in default on their mortgages?
Thought so.
Sphere: Related ContentHie thee, Dear Gentle Reader(s), to the Telnaes animated cartoon over at washingtonpost.com.
Although Gov. Richards made the statement about Bush I, it is very appropriate to Bush II.
Animated cartoon eyes are quite telling; notice, especially Telnaes’ ability with W’s eyes.
Sphere: Related ContentAndrew Sullivan has a snippet about President Bush’s pardons. It seems Bush is being generous to “S&L executives and others who swindled thrifts in the mid-1980’s...”
Hmmm. Wasn’t there a Bush brother, or two and a father, involved with an S&L in Colorado? Didn’t he come out without doing time? Something like Silverado? (Gotta love Google!)
Just askin’.
Sphere: Related ContentIt isn’t often, Dear Gentle Reader(s), that a liberal comes to the virtual assistance of Governor Palin, but it’s time.
This brouhaha about the press statement backdropped by a couple of turkeys being slaughtered is a lot of ado about not much.
One remembers, for instance, watching one’s mother grabbing a chicken by the head and then twirling it around until the neck was broken. (Then one remembers pouring scalding water over the chicken to prepare the feathers for plucking—not to mention the subsequent gutting!)
One also remembers one’s mother being given the knife when one’s father and neighbors were preparing to slaughter a young pig. One gains a certain respect for one’s mother who is capable of slicing open the neck of a pig, and placing a pan in the appropriate spot to catch the blood—to be used later in sausage.
A turkey being prepared for a Thanksgiving table? Bring it on. It’s the way of a carbon based world.
Go Sarah!
Sphere: Related Content…on my way to buy a new food processor, Dear Gentle Reader(s). The stock market fell to new lows.
Hmmm. Perhaps one ought to wait on new purchases…just in case one needs the money later on for macaroni and cheese boxes.
Nice going, deregulators, whoever you were/are.
Sphere: Related ContentDear Gentle Reader(s), there’s a teensy bit of evidence that the Bush II legacy has done more damage to the Justice Department than originally thought.
It’s a crisis of diminished confidence.
In today’s Los Angeles Times the lead editorial carries this title and subtitle:
Seeking Justice
Eric Holder has the credentials to be U.S. attorney general, but he may be seen as too close to President-elect Barack Obama.
Holder has the credentials, but is possibly too close to Mr. Obama? How close is too close? What was the relationship between John F and Robert Kennedy? Was AG Kennedy deemed a failure in the job as is the case with Alberto Gonzales?
The Times editorial board worries that Holden’s association with the Obama campaign might make him someone who could “be caricatured as a presidential insider.”
If the Obama administration is to be careful of caricature, then we are in for a very long 4 years.
The Gonzales Justice Department, and, to a lesser extent, the John Ashcroft Justice Department, were anomalies. The whole Bush presidency was, one is hopeful, an anomaly. That said, there shouldn’t be an undue amount of caution in supporting a President’s choice for a cabinet member just because of fear of caricature.
Let’s all get a grip, DGR(s). Our long winter of discontent is about to become a summer.
Sphere: Related ContentAndrew Sullivan, Dear Gentle Reader(s), occasionally mystifies. His obsession with Senator Clinton is well documented, but little other than his “gut” can account for it. He is rapidly amassing the same amount of virtual ink with his relentless focus on Governor Palin. Those are, however, gut mysteries which actually have no rationale beyond a sort of irrational rationale; and that’s Sullivan’s personal problem. Who cares? It’s his occasional logical mystery which is most bothersome.
Here is a quote about the current debate on the fate of Proposition 8 from “The Daily Dish,” Sullivan’s blog, which is offered for your consideration:
Both supporters and opponents have asked for a judicial ruling on whether the initiative can stand. My own view is that it should stand, and the court should decline to reverse it. We lost. They won in a fair fight.
“They won in a fair fight.” Really? One wonders. If the proponents of Prop 8 had not focused on children the final weeks of the campaign, would they have “won?” Had the focus of the campaign been totally about whether or not civil rights, found to be guaranteed under the California state constitution, should be stripped from neighbors, colleagues, and family members, would “they” have won?
Everyone talks about dirty campaigns; all’s fair in love and war—all bromides which paper over the immoral tactics some who debate an issue pursue. It’s one thing when “rogue” partisans run the Willie Horton ads, or the 527s demean Senator Kerry, or when Sarah Palin implies Barack Obama hangs with terrorists, but it’s quite another when a religious-based political group, with religious financial support and pulpit support resorts to lying and using children in the lie.
The proponents of Prop 8 were/are odious liars. Their campaign was not honorable.
The three witches never else spoke so much truth.
How, Andrew, is it that “They won in a fair fight?”
Sphere: Related ContentOne has a deep and abiding admiration, Dear Gentle Reader(s), for persons who have the ability to “play” with words and to see possibilities in the written language.
Today, for example, at the Palm Springs City Hall demonstration against Prop 8, there was a sign which originally read
ONLY
MORONS
HATE
and which had been changed, but a carat and a tilted M to read
ONLY
MOR^M ONS
HATE
Well, you get the picture.
God bless America!
Sphere: Related ContentIt's hard to believe, Dear Gentle Reader(s), that there is so much vitriol being hurled towards Governor Palin lately.
Frankly, it must be said loudly and often that Senator McCain and Senator McCain alone is responsible for Palin's disastrous debut on the national political stage. He hadn't met her, she wasn't properly vetted, she was not ready for the job, and she's been treated shabbily lately. He should be ashamed.
For the senator to choose an unprepared political tyro for the vice presidential nomination solely (sometimes the conventional wisdom is incorrect, but there's virtually no other rationale for her choice) to stir up the Republican base of evangelical Christianists was beneath contempt.
Presidential politics isn't, true, beanbag; but it doesn't have to be shooting a fish in a barrel, either.
Palin has energy which served her well on the stump. If she were more seasoned in policies outside of Alaska and if she were a Democrat, it would be easy to see her in federal politics in the future.
Until then, people should back off. While she bears some responsibility for accepting McCain's offer, it is McCain himself who bears the most responsibility.
Put him in the metaphorical barrel.
It's just logical.
Sphere: Related Content