Thursday, May 28, 2009

Facts? We don’ need no stinkin’ facts!

Of 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 Content

Saturday, May 23, 2009

Really?

Ah, 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 Content

Sunday, May 17, 2009

A dollar 98? A dollar 400?

Technorati Tags:

Does 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.?

                                           008

IN case it seems fuzzy, that is a period after the 1.

What fun!

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, May 15, 2009

Could’ve, Would of, Shoulda (“Ve” are watching!)

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 Content

Thursday, May 14, 2009

A Hopeful Step to the Trash Heap of History

Thoreau’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 Content

Friday, April 24, 2009

America’s Soul Is the Soul of All of Us

If, 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 Content

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Juvenilia Revived

Oh 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 Content

Friday, April 10, 2009

We are everywhere

The 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 Content

Sunday, April 05, 2009

Dowd’s Seduction?

It 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 Content

Thursday, April 02, 2009

4.2.38

Technorati Tags: ,

A 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 Content

Monday, March 30, 2009

One (more perfect) Art

I 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 Content

Sunday, March 29, 2009

Uh-Oh!

Getting 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.


Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, March 19, 2009

What? Another first?!? (About time!)

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 Content

Wednesday, March 18, 2009

Double the tax

Technorati Tags: ,,

There’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 Content

Sunday, March 15, 2009

Tone Deaf

Technorati Tags: ,,

Isn’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 Content

Sunday, March 08, 2009

Que? What? Huh?

Alas, 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 Content

Saturday, March 07, 2009

Theology—When Logic and Clarity Lose

There 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 Content

Friday, March 06, 2009

Un mot

Here, Dear Gentle Reader(s), is a little mental health break: 

Thus speaketh Upton Sinclair:

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 Content

Tuesday, March 03, 2009

A Tale of Ruth

No, 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 Content

Sunday, March 01, 2009

Giving Credit

Remember 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 Content